Mungatana reiterates his support for Gachagua’s impeachment
Following the recent Court of Appeal ruling that nullified the three-judge bench appointed by Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu to hear Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua’s case, Tana River Senator Danson Mungatana has maintained his firm stance on the matter.
The court ruled that Mwilu lacked the authority to constitute such a bench, a responsibility that lies exclusively with the Chief Justice.
Mungatana, who played a key role in the initial push to have Gachagua impeached, insists that the court ruling does not change his position.
He argues that Gachagua’s tenure as Deputy President was characterised by deep regional bias, which disqualified him from serving as a national leader.
According to the senator, Gachagua focused primarily on his Mount Kenya backyard at the expense of other regions, failing to unite the country as expected of someone in his position.
He further stated that this pattern of regional favouritism was the very reason he initiated a motion of censure against Gachagua in the Senate, setting the stage for the impeachment proceedings that followed.
To Mungatana, Gachagua’s leadership style was not only divisive but also unfit for a person holding such a critical national office.
“Even if the entire impeachment process were to be repeated, I would still vote to impeach Gachagua. Remember, I was the one who tabled the motion of censure before the impeachment motion reached the Senate. I had my reasons — you can’t be a Deputy President who champions only one region. He was misplaced in that position.” Said Danson Mungatana
Mungatana likened the then deteriorating relationship between President William Ruto and Gachagua that led to his impeachment to a painful marriage that could no longer be sustained.
He claimed the fallout had become inevitable, and that the president had no choice but to cut ties rather than continue clinging to a dysfunctional partnership, which was affecting his service delivery
Gachagua’s reaction to court ruling
On his part, Gachagua, speaking during a church service in Juja, appeared unshaken by the court’s decision or the political pressure surrounding him.
He expressed confidence in the judiciary and its ability to uphold justice despite the challenges he has faced in recent months.
Legitimacy of Mwilu bench
At the centre of the legal dispute was the question of whether the Deputy Chief Justice had the legal authority to constitute a multi-judge bench.
According to the Constitution and judicial practice in Kenya, only the Chief Justice has the mandate to empanel a bench of more than one judge to hear a constitutional or significant legal matter.
Mwilu’s decision to bypass Chief Justice Martha Koome and form the bench on her own was challenged in court.
The challenge argued that Mwilu acted ultra vires—beyond her powers and that such a bench could not be considered legally constituted.
The Court of Appeal agreed, ruling that the formation of the three-judge bench by the DCJ was unlawful.
