Supreme Court allows Gachagua’s cross-appeal in impeachment case

The Supreme Court on Friday handed former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua a partial legal victory after allowing his cross-appeal challenging judicial bias to proceed.

In a consolidated ruling, a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice Martha Koome dismissed attempts by the National Assembly to strike out Gachagua’s cross-appeal, affirming his right to contest the Court of Appeal’s findings on whether High Court judges who handled his impeachment petitions ought to have recused themselves.

Gachagua argues that the three-judge bench that heard his impeachment-related cases was tainted by bias and conflict of interest.

He claimed the Court of Appeal erred by dismissing his concerns, including allegations of a close personal relationship between one judge and a senior parliamentary official, and by failing to apply the correct legal test on the “reasonable apprehension of bias.”

The apex court ruled that the issues raised go beyond procedural technicalities and directly implicate the constitutional right to a fair hearing under Article 50 of the Constitution.

“We reject the submissions by the National Assembly that the issues raised in the cross-appeal are distinct from those in the appeal,” the court ruled.

However, the judges declined to grant Gachagua further relief, dismissing his application seeking to strike out the original appeal filed by the National Assembly.

The National Assembly is challenging a Court of Appeal decision which held that the power to empanel a bench to hear impeachment matters lies exclusively with the Chief Justice and cannot be delegated.

Gachagua had sought to block that appeal, but the Supreme Court found no basis for its summary dismissal.

“We find that this application by Hon. Gachagua lacks merit and dismiss it in its entirety,” the court ruled.

The court also rejected Gachagua’s request to suspend ongoing impeachment proceedings at the High Court, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to interfere with proceedings at that level.

Additionally, his bid to expunge certain documents from the record of appeal was dismissed, with the judges finding the materials central to the dispute before the court.

“By necessary and logical reasoning, only proceedings before the Court of Appeal can be stayed by this Court. Yet the instant application is inviting us to stay, not the proceedings in the Court of Appeal, but those before the High Court,” the judges stated.