The Independent Uganda: You get the Truth we Pay the Price
Nairobi, Kenya | THE STAR KENYA | Chief Justice Martha Koome now stands at the centre of a political and legal storm following new developments regarding the impeachment of Rigathi Gachagua.
The law requires the Chief Registrar of the Judiciary to administer the oath of office to the Deputy President designate in the presence of Chief Justice Martha Koome or the Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu.
But with the High Court having suspended the appointment of a new Deputy President hours after Rigathi Gachagua’s ouster was upheld by the Senate, the CJ faces a constitutional litmus test.
Eyes are on the CJ on whether she will, in good conscience, proceed with the swearing-in of Interior CS Kindiki, who now stands as Deputy President nominee.
Questions that loom over her are, if she proceeds with the swearing-in, would she be undermining the Judiciary’s authority or be seen as acting in defiance of the order issued by Justice Chacha Mwita?
The Chief Registrar of the Judiciary has since received the order issued by Mwita earlier today.
Earlier today, Mwita certified as urgent a case filed by Gachagua through his Advocate Senior Counsel Paul Muite challenging the Senate’s decision to uphold his impeachment.
The Judge said there will be no appointments done to replace Gachagua until October 24.
Mwita at the same time referred the matter to Chief Justice Martha Koome to empanel a bench to determine the weighty issues raised by Gachagua.
Further directions are to be issued by the bench on October 24.
Gachagua maintains that the charges levelled against him before the National Assembly and subsequently the Senate hold no water.
The former DP says the Senate was required by law to act as an impartial arbitrator in considering whether the charges before it have been substantiated or not.
He maintains that the evidence relied on forming the basis for his impeachment was insufficient.
This, he says, went against the standard set by the Court of Appeal in the Martin Wambora case, where it was decided that in matters of impeachment, allegations must be serious, substantial, and weighty and that the charges as framed must disclose a gross violation of the law to which the DP maintains there was none.
“Unfounded and false allegations have been made against me in the impeachment motion before both houses. It would be in the interest of justice that such false information be corrected in line with the provisions of Article 35 of the Constitution,” read his documents in part.
At least 53 out of 66 senators on Thursday night voted to uphold the charge levelled against him by the national assembly last week.
The impeachment motion was fronted by Kibwezi MP Mwengi Mutuse, which subsequently ended up in the Senate.
Five other applications have since been filed following Gachagua’s ouster.
The others have been filed by Sheria Mtaani, thirty petitioners from Mt Kenya Region, Emmanuel Elija Otieno, an advocate of the High Court, and another filed by David Mathenge in Kerugoya court.
In the one filed by Sheria Mtaani by advocate Shaddrack Wambui, Justice Lawrence Mugambi said since the court has already expressed itself in other related matters whose subject is the impeachment of the Deputy President, the same be transmitted to the CJ to consider appointing a bench that will determine the cases.
****
SOURCE: THE STAR KENYA
