Former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua’s demand for more than KSh80 million in compensation has reopened debate on Kenya’s constitutional process for removing a Deputy President from office.
Under Article 150 of the Constitution, a Deputy President can be removed either on grounds of physical or mental incapacity, or through impeachment for gross violation of the Constitution or any law, suspected crime under national or international law, or gross misconduct. The same article says that the impeachment procedure used to remove a President under Articles 144 and 145 also applies to a Deputy President, with necessary changes.
Gachagua became the first sitting Deputy President in Kenya to be removed through impeachment after the Senate upheld five out of 11 charges against him in October 2024. AP reported that the Senate vote on one of the counts stood at 54-13, surpassing the required two-thirds threshold, while the National Assembly had earlier voted 282-44 to impeach him.
Now, the former DP has shifted his legal battle from reinstatement to compensation. According to court details reported by Kenyans.co.ke, his legal team is seeking about KSh42 million in unpaid salary for the 35 months he claims he would have remained in office, KSh22.8 million in gratuity, KSh700,000 in airtime allowance, plus medical cover, transport benefits and pension-related claims.
His argument appears to lean on the constitutional protection of remuneration and benefits. Article 151 states that the remuneration and benefits of the President and Deputy President are charged on the Consolidated Fund and should not be varied to their disadvantage while in office. It also protects retirement benefits, facilities and privileges of a former President and former Deputy President during their lifetime.
However, the key legal question is whether an impeached Deputy President is entitled to benefits as though he completed his term, or whether removal through a constitutional process cuts off those claims. That question now sits at the centre of Gachagua’s case.
The dispute is therefore no longer just political. It has become a test of how Kenya interprets impeachment, public office benefits, and the financial rights of a Deputy President removed before the end of a five-year term.
Under Article 150 of the Constitution, a Deputy President can be removed either on grounds of physical or mental incapacity, or through impeachment for gross violation of the Constitution or any law, suspected crime under national or international law, or gross misconduct. The same article says that the impeachment procedure used to remove a President under Articles 144 and 145 also applies to a Deputy President, with necessary changes.
Gachagua became the first sitting Deputy President in Kenya to be removed through impeachment after the Senate upheld five out of 11 charges against him in October 2024. AP reported that the Senate vote on one of the counts stood at 54-13, surpassing the required two-thirds threshold, while the National Assembly had earlier voted 282-44 to impeach him.
Now, the former DP has shifted his legal battle from reinstatement to compensation. According to court details reported by Kenyans.co.ke, his legal team is seeking about KSh42 million in unpaid salary for the 35 months he claims he would have remained in office, KSh22.8 million in gratuity, KSh700,000 in airtime allowance, plus medical cover, transport benefits and pension-related claims.
His argument appears to lean on the constitutional protection of remuneration and benefits. Article 151 states that the remuneration and benefits of the President and Deputy President are charged on the Consolidated Fund and should not be varied to their disadvantage while in office. It also protects retirement benefits, facilities and privileges of a former President and former Deputy President during their lifetime.
However, the key legal question is whether an impeached Deputy President is entitled to benefits as though he completed his term, or whether removal through a constitutional process cuts off those claims. That question now sits at the centre of Gachagua’s case.
The dispute is therefore no longer just political. It has become a test of how Kenya interprets impeachment, public office benefits, and the financial rights of a Deputy President removed before the end of a five-year term.
