Kibwezi West MP Mwengi Mutuse has welcomed the High Court’s decision to uphold the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, describing the ruling as a legal affirmation of Parliament’s actions while calling for further reforms to define the consequences of impeachment.
In a statement issued on Monday following the court’s ruling, Mutuse, who moved the impeachment motion in the National Assembly, said he felt vindicated by the outcome.
He praised the three-judge bench for what he termed as a comprehensive clarification of constitutional law on impeachment.
“I was certain that our courts could not have arrived at any other finding than to uphold the impeachment,” Mutuse said, adding that the judgment reinforces Parliament’s authority in holding senior state officers accountable.
The High Court upheld Gachagua’s removal from office, finding that both the National Assembly and Senate acted within constitutional limits.
However, the court also ruled that Gachagua’s right to a fair hearing had been violated during Senate proceedings and awarded him Sh50 million in damages, without overturning the impeachment.
Mutuse said the ruling settles key legal questions but opens a new debate on the broader implications of impeachment under Kenya’s Constitution.
He questioned whether individuals removed from office through impeachment should continue to enjoy full political rights, including participation in party activities and influence in governance.
“What is the full legal significance of an impeachment?” he posed, arguing that the current framework leaves gaps that could undermine the accountability process.
Drawing a comparison to criminal justice, the MP suggested that allowing impeached leaders to remain active in politics creates a contradiction.
He likened it to a convicted individual continuing normal life without serving a sentence, a situation he said weakens public confidence in governance systems.
In his view, individuals found unfit to hold public office through impeachment should withdraw from active public life. He proposed that this issue be addressed through legislative reforms to align impeachment outcomes with stricter political consequences.
The remarks are likely to spark debate within legal and political circles, particularly on the balance between constitutional rights under Article 38 and the accountability standards expected of public officials.