- President William Ruto, through his legal team, had averred that the High Court does not have jurisdiction over the impeachment of his deputy Rigathi Gachagua
- Ruto argued that the petitions filed to challenge the ouster could only be determined by the Supreme Court
- But in her ruling, Justice Freda Mugambi established that impeachment is a constitutional process, and just like the apex court, the High Court also got the judicial powers to review it (the ouster)
PAY ATTENTION: Got a Minute? Complete Our Quick Survey About TUKO.co.ke!
Eli Odaga, a journalist at TUKO.co.ke, brings more than three years of experience covering politics and current affairs in Kenya.
The High Court in Nairobi has thrown out the argument that it cannot conclusively hear and determine the numerous petitions filed to challenge Rigathi Gachagua’s impeachment.
Through his lawyer, President William Ruto had averred that only the Supreme Court has the capacity to look into the anti-impeachment petitions.
Gachagua moved to court to challenge his impeachment, and further seek an injunction to stop the process of installing the outgoing Interior Cabinet Secretary Kithure Kindiki as his replacement.
PAY ATTENTION:TUKO is in WhatsApp Channels now! Subscribe and read news in favourite messenger.
In her ruling, Justice Freda Mugambi established that impeachment is a constitutional process and, therefore, the High Court can have the powers, just like the apex court, to undertake a judicial review of the process.
“It is undisputed that the impeachment of the deputy president is a constitutional process and the authority to determine whether the merits and procedure of such impeachment process falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the High court,” she said.
Source: TUKO.co.ke
