Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua’s lawyer, Njeri Maina, has reportedly told the court that there were inconsistencies in the impeachment process of Gachagua.
Njeri Maina alleged that the public participation exercise was deliberately structured to exclude Kenyans.
Appearing before the court, Njeri argued that the impeachment process violated constitutional requirements on public participation and fairness.
According to her, the process failed to meet the threshold for adequate public involvement and described it as ‘planned, intentional, and orchestrated’ against the former DP.
Three key issues formed the basis of the case: what amounts to adequate public participation, what qualifies as reasonable notice, and how qualitative and quantitative participation should be interpreted.
“There was systematic exclusion in various constituencies. Some of the offices remained closed. This was not accidental. It was intentional, it was planned, and it vitiated the adequacy of the process and its outcome,” Njeri Maina said.
“I submit that a public gazette was issued on the 5th of October 2024, and subsequently on the same day, a public participation was undertaken,” she added.
The lawyer argued that Kenyans were denied meaningful participation because no civic education was conducted before the exercise, insisting that there were no supporting materials or explanations on how to fill the template forms.
Additionally , she challenged the National Assembly’s reliance on Standing Order 64(2) to shorten timelines during the impeachment process.
She further maintained that parliamentary standing orders cannot supersede the Constitution, particularly Articles 10 and 118, which govern public participation.
