Rhui_James

Trust is a luxury that only the naïve can afford.

[Ahmednasir Abdullahi SC @ahmednasirlaw]

I'm GLAD that H.E @rigathi now agrees with me that Kenya's JurisPESA judges poses an existential threat to Kenya and her people.

[Donald B Kipkorir @DonaldBKipkorir]

Cheptongei Village Tribunal Judgement:

We agree with you that your neighour cut your fence & stole your cow. We can see the cow in his compound. But we are afraid we can’t return the cow as he has fixed the fence where he had cut. But to compensate you, we will give you a goat!

Case Dismissed.

[Ndong@Conslaw @Ndonglaw043]

The fight at the Court of Appeal will not be Rigathi Gachagua. Bigger than him. You cannot SHRED the Bill of Rights into pieces like that.

[🇰🇪 James WaNjeri @JamesKWaNjeri]

I miss when our High Court had Mumbi, Lenaola, Mativo etc. you’d get good well thought out decisions. Today’s impeachment decision should be quoted alongside Biwott’s on how judges can just bump into dark corners of their own making and arrive at a thing called a judgment

[Linus Kaikai @LinusKaikai]

HIGH COURT upholds impeachment of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua; but rules his constitutional rights were violated and awards him Ksh. 50M.

[Sen. Methu Muhia @methumuhia]

Your rights were violated, but the decision of that violation stands.

Even a nursery school drop out like Oscar Kipchumba Sudi is surprised by such mediocrity.

[Ohta Ryota 🇸🇬 @Ohta_Ryota]

That Mrima Judge was reading those papers like he was seeing them for the first time...hata aliruka some paragraphs....imebidi mpaka Muite aitishe complete video recordings of the proceedings ndio wampike hapo mbele

[David Maraga @dkmaraga]

Lawful Democratic Expression Met with Violence.

[Nelson Havi SC @NelsonHavi]

Physical Court is sometimes good. Judges are not as inconsiderate as they often appear online. Today, the Judge asked that we move closer and not sit far away. Seeing our hesitation, the Judge maintained that the Court does not bite and gave an assuring smile. We have left the Court happy.

[Nelson Havi SC @NelsonHavi]

Before which Court will they arraign C J David Maraga? Some actions and decisions by the Executive are often outrightly stupid.

[Mutahi Kahiga @GovernorKahiga]

That was a miscarriage of Justice! Processes,procedures and fidelity to the Law grossly breached in the impeachment!
The Ksh 50 million Award in damages is no Consolation! Fight on Riggy G! It shall be well

[Thuranira @Thuranira_1]

You can't have a constitutional outcome after conducting unconstitutional process. The High court has given us an absurd judgment.

[Charles Kanjama SC @ckanjama]

The Law Society of Kenya strongly condemns the shocking arrest of Chief Justice Emeritus @dkmaraga and environmental activists protesting the irregular allocation of 76 acres of Nairobi National Park. Bundling a retired head of our Judiciary into a police vehicle for peacefully opposing a Sh42 Billion project, reportedly pushed through without public participation, is a direct assault on the civic space guaranteed under Article 37 of the Constitution. National heritage sites are not state property to barter behind closed doors.

The LSK will not stand by while police force is weaponized against constitutional defenders. We have immediately dispatched an LSK legal team to Lang’ata Police Station to secure the unconditional release of the activists, and I commend the CJ Emeritus for refusing to leave custody until all those arrested with him are freed. We demand an immediate end to the harassment of civic actors and a transparent public audit of the Bomas expansion plan. The @LawSocietyofKe remains firmly on the frontlines to protect our laws and our land.

[Mercy 🇰🇪🇱🇷 @wanguimercie96]

@FaithOdhiambo8 The rules of natural justice were blatantly ignored in the judgement. It was more of a political decision instead of a legal one. When process is flawed, the outcome should be invalid. The court could have orders retrial at Senate or invalidate the outcome. Compromised bench!!

[Faith Odhiambo @FaithOdhiambo8]

Yesterday's High Court judgment on the impeachment of H.E. Rigathi Gachagua raises serious and legitimate questions that our constitutional jurisprudence must grapple with honestly. The three-judge bench found that the Senate violated the former Deputy President's right to a fair hearing under Article 50 of the Constitution specifically by declining to grant an adjournment when he was unable to attend the proceedings. The court acknowledged that violation, issued a declaratory order and awarded Ksh.50 million in constitutional damages. Yet the bench ultimately upheld the impeachment itself. I respect the court and the constitutional role it plays. But I believe this outcome calls for serious reflection on the coherence of our remedial framework.

The tension in the judgment lies in this, if the Senate's refusal to adjourn was a constitutional infirmity serious enough to warrant a finding of violation and a Ksh.50 million award, then the question that naturally follows is whether that infirmity was capable of tainting the entire removal process. The right to a fair hearing is not procedural decoration. It is a substantive constitutional guarantee, particularly in proceedings that result in the removal of a person from high public office. Courts must therefore grapple carefully with what it means to vindicate a right while simultaneously affirming the outcome that flowed from its violation. It is a difficult balance and I appreciate that the bench was navigating complicated constitutional terrain.

It is instructive to recall the reasoning of the Supreme Court in the landmark 2017 presidential election petition delivered by the then Chief Justice David Maraga. The court, in a 4-2 majority, nullified the presidential election not on the basis that the outcome was necessarily wrong but on the basis that the process through which it was arrived at did not conform to the Constitution and the law. The court found that irregularities and illegalities in the transmission of results had compromised the integrity of the election and that the constitutional standard required more than a plausible result, it required a process that was itself constitutionally compliant. That principle that a flawed process cannot produce a constitutionally valid outcome remains a pillar of our public law.

When we place that 2017 reasoning alongside yesterday's judgment, a legitimate concern emerges. Both cases involved constitutional violations in the course of a high-stakes removal or electoral process. In 2017, the violation of constitutional standards was sufficient to nullify the result entirely. Yesterday, a violation of the right to a fair hearing was found, remedied in damages but the result was preserved. These are not necessarily irreconcilable positions, courts do have discretion in fashioning remedies but the distinction must be clearly reasoned and transparently justified because the precedent being set will govern how future impeachments are conducted and how future courts respond to violations within those processes.

My concern is about the precedent this decision may establish. If a constitutional violation during impeachment proceedings can be remedied by damages without disturbing the outcome, future Parliaments and Senates may not feel the full weight of their constitutional obligations when handling removal proceedings. The court itself noted the urgent need for Parliament to enact a dedicated statutory framework under Article 150 governing the removal of a Deputy President which is a legislative gap that should never have existed this long. That recommendation must not be ignored. A constitutional democracy is built on the integrity of its processes not merely its outcomes. We must ensure that the right to a fair hearing in Kenya remains substantive and not merely symbolic.

[Boniface @kilundeezy]

Leo nataka kila mtu atoke na atleast 500 verified followers afikishe monitization it’s up to you guys👇

[Rhui_James @Rhui_James]

@Entr_dawood Enemies of progress wamejaa hizi mitaa... #Engage

[Rhui_James @Rhui_James]

@Kingsholz Hi

[Rhui_James @Rhui_James]

Maybe these student unrest across the country are admin made. A way of telling the government that capitation funds aren’t enough to run schools, and they’re using students to pass the message because they’re tired of operating broke learning institutions. Just maybe.

[the_ceo @the_ceo99]

A real woman will cut off any male that threatens her relationship with her man.

A girl will justify it, make excuses and keep him as an option.