In a firm decision, the court directed that all the matters should proceed to a full hearing, clearing the way for judges to listen to arguments from all sides and make a final determination.
The cases before the court were filed by different individuals and groups who are questioning the legality and fairness of Gachagua’s impeachment.
Some of the petitioners had asked the Supreme Court to first stop the hearings, arguing that there were serious constitutional issues that needed urgent intervention.
However, the judges were not persuaded that halting the process was necessary at this stage.
In its ruling, the court emphasized that the issues raised are weighty and touch on the Constitution, governance, and the proper conduct of impeachment proceedings.
Because of this, the judges said the best way to address the concerns is through a full hearing rather than temporary orders that would delay the process.
The court made it clear that justice is better served when all parties are given a chance to present their arguments fully.
By allowing the hearings to proceed, the Supreme Court signaled that it is ready to examine the impeachment process in detail.
This means that the court will look at whether the law was followed, whether Gachagua was given a fair chance to defend himself, and whether Parliament acted within its constitutional limits.
The judges will also consider broader questions about the balance of power between the Legislature and other arms of government.
For Gachagua, the decision means that the legal battle over his impeachment is far from over. While the court did not stop the cases, it also did not make a final decision on the merits of the impeachment itself.
His lawyers will now have the opportunity to argue their case during the full hearing, where evidence and legal reasoning will be closely examined.
The ruling is also important for the country. Impeachment is a serious process with far-reaching consequences, and how courts handle such cases sets an important precedent.
Many Kenyans are watching closely, as the outcome could shape how future impeachments are conducted and how disputes between political institutions are resolved.