Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua recently declared his intention to run for the country’s apex seat in the next general election.
The DCP leader announced that he would vie for the presidency in 2027 during roadside stops when he and his party officials toured the Mt Kenya region on Saturday, September 13, 2025.
Gachagua’s declaration has since elicited heated debate on his eligibility. This follows his impeachment by the National Assembly on October 8, 2024, which was later confirmed by the Senate. Article 75(3) of the Constitution says anyone removed from office through impeachment is barred from holding public office.
But opinions remain sharply divided. While some legal scholars say he has a lifeline, others disagree, even as legislators who impeached him insist their resolution in the House sealed his fate.
Being a matter of great public interest, various media outlets have written articles, held interviews as well as panel discussions in an attempt to get to the bottom of the matter.
NTV interviewed constitutional lawyer Charles Kanjama, who opined that while Gachagua stands impeached and the provisions on Chapter 6 on leadership and integrity triggered, he is not barred from vying for the top seat.
He cited Article 99(3) that states a person is not disqualified under clause 2(h) until all appeals or reviews are exhausted. Until that process is complete, he is allowed to continue serving in any public office that he can be appointed or elected to, Kanjama argued, adding that the cases could delay beyond 2027. There are seven constitutional petitions in the High Court challenging Gachagua’s impeachment.
On Wednesday, September 17, 2025, the People Daily splashed the story, ‘Why Gachagua can’t run for presidency’.
PD writer Reuben Mwambingu quoted lawyer and political analyst Javas Bigambo, who said Gachagua cannot legally be on the ballot. He noted that a person who has been dismissed or otherwise removed from office for contravention of the provisions specified in clause two is disqualified from holding any other state office. “Courts have never overturned a proper impeachment,” Bigambo said.
Still in the article, lawyer Katua Muinde said impeachment was not just removal from office but a formal finding that a leader has violated the Constitution and abused public trust. He pointed to Article 99, which lays out the requirements for election of a presidential candidate and which provides that “unless a person is disqualified for reasons including impeachment”, any person who meets other requirements can vie.
Another officer of the court, Philip Mwangale, argued that Gachagua has not contested his conviction but the process leading to his impeachment. According to him, even though there is some protection for him should he appeal, that protection is dealt a blow by the requirement for a moral and ethical standard established by Article 75(3). He is, therefore, currently disqualified from holding public office.
Mwangale said the question that IEBC and EACC will be answering will be whether Gachagua satisfies Article 99(1)(b) even though he is not disqualified under Article 99(2). His verdict is thatGachagua’s right to appeal is not an acquittal.
The media did a commendable job in exposing the public to the different interpretations of the Constitution. While the matter remains unsettled, the ongoing debate is not just healthy but critical to the understanding of both the letter and spirit of the law.
