High Court to Rule on Legality of Deputy President Kindiki’s Appointment
National Assembly counsel Paul Nyamodi and Speaker Moses Wetang’ula’s lawyer Peter Wanyama accused the petitioners of delaying proceedings.
High Court to rule on Deputy President Kindiki’s appointment on July 31 amid fallout from Gachagua’s impeachment. Photo/The Standard Kenya.
By Robert Assad
A three-judge bench of the High Court will deliver a ruling on July 31, 2025, to determine whether Deputy President Kithure Kindiki was lawfully appointed, amid continued legal and political fallout from the impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.
Justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Mrima, and Freda Mugambi set the ruling date during a tense court session on Thursday. The bench is handling consolidated petitions challenging Gachagua’s removal and Kindiki’s rise to office.
The legal dispute follows a Court of Appeal ruling on May 9, which found that an earlier three-judge bench appointed by Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu had been unconstitutionally constituted.
During Thursday’s proceedings, Kerugoya Woman Representative Njeri Maina and MCA David Mathenge, through lawyers Andrew Muge and George Sakimpa, sought clarification on whether 2024 court orders that halted Gachagua’s impeachment remain valid in light of the appeal ruling.
Adding complexity, Rigathi Gachagua, represented by Senior Counsel Paul Muite, filed an urgent application dated June 18 seeking to withdraw four pre-impeachment petitions, arguing that they had been overtaken by events. However, activist Fredrick Mula opposed the withdrawal and filed to substitute himself as petitioner in one of the cases, Petition 522 of 2024.
Muite condemned the move as “hostile and irregular,” warning that such substitution could prejudice Gachagua’s legal strategy. The court has yet to rule on the withdrawal request or Mula’s substitution bid.
Meanwhile, National Assembly counsel Paul Nyamodi and Speaker Moses Wetang’ula’s lawyer Peter Wanyama accused the petitioners of delaying proceedings. They urged the current bench to maintain control and dismiss efforts to seek the Chief Justice’s intervention.
The court will issue further directions alongside its ruling on July 31, a decision that could have major political and constitutional implications.
About Author
