A total of 282 lawmakers voted in favour of the motion against 44 who wanted Mr Gachagua to stay. The votes represented a reduction of 10 compared to 291 MPs who initially signed up in support of the motion.
The mover of the motion, Mr Mwengi Mutuse, representing Kibwezi West Constituency, needed to marshal at least 233 MPs equivalent of two-thirds of the House membership to force the impeachment motion through.
It followed a long day of debate that saw the second-in-command take to the stand to defend himself against 11 charges that had been levelled against him.
Now, DP Gachagua’s fate will be in the hands of the Senate, the trial House which is the next battlefront of the vicious fight that epitomises the fallout between Mr Gachagua and his boss William Ruto elected on Kenya Kwanza/UDA ticket in August 2022.
National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula is expected to notify his Senate Counterpart Amason Kingi of the vote latest by Thursday.
“The Clerk is directed to prepare the necessary documentation to enable this,” Speaker Wetang’ula said shortly after 9pm on announcing the results.
Once Mr Kingi is in receipt of the resolution notice from the National Assembly, he is required to convene a Senate meeting within seven days to consider the charges against the DP.
A number of MPs, especially from Mr Gachagua’s Central Kenya backyard, had a change of heart after initially supporting the motion and encountering hostility in their constituencies. They did it to save their careers.
Earlier, the DP had been forced to eat humble pie and apologise to the members of the National Assembly over what the lawmakers termed contemptuous comments in his media address on Monday.
This even as the DP played video clips in the National Assembly that appeared to drag President Ruto into the charges facing him to try and save his neck.
DP Rigathi’s explosive interview happened just a day before his date with the National Assembly to defend himself against the impeachment motion by Kibwezi West MP Mwengi Mutuse.
In his media address, DP Gachagua dismissed the motion arguing it contained unfounded allegations, baseless rumours and political witch hunt. He described them as a choreographed scheme to hound him out of office prematurely.
This did go down well with the MPs. Setting the mood that characterised the debate on the impeachment motion, National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula called him out, terming his conduct during the briefing, “abhorrent”.
“The Standing Orders prohibits non-members especially persons affected by such motions when interpreted broadly. The DP ought to have refrained from holding the interview,” said Speaker Wetang’ula earlier in the day.
“Be that as it may, I will not be the judge on this matter but permit me to say that the conduct was least to say abhorrent in the light of proceedings before this House,” the Speaker said.
When he appeared in the House to defend himself against the allegations, a visibly nailed second-in-command had no choice but to apologise to the MPs following an intervention from the Speaker on the request of Tiaty MP Kamket Kassait, who had referred to the DP as “my in-law.”
“I have tremendous respect for this House and your ability and capacity,” said DP Gachagua, just before he started his two-hour line of defense.
The DP was represented by his lawyers led by Senior Counsel Paul Muite, Mr Elisha Ongoya, Mr Tom Kimani, Mr Victor Swanya and Ndegwa Njiru among others.
Among the videos that the DP played include that of the president calling his Cabinet Secretaries and Principal Secretaries lazy after he locked them out in two meetings during a cabinet retreat in Nanyuki and at the State House in Nairobi.
He also played a video showing the president publicly attacking the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) boss George Kinoti, who was later forced to resign, and reminded the House that it was unfair to lynch him.
“I took the cue from my boss, the president, who taught me to call out incompetent public officers. But you are not impeaching him over the same,” Mr Gachagua told the House.
“I am persuaded that the NIS boss ought to have known beforehand that the public was completely opposed to the Finance Bill and they ought to have briefed the President before the protests began,” the DP told the MPs.
The DP noted that had the NIS boss acted in good time, “this would have caused a change of tact by the government regarding the proposed Bill and the protests which culminated in the loss of innocent lives and the destruction of property could have been avoided.”
“The hotel used to belong to my deceased brother and therefore, has never been my property,” Gachagua said adding; “upon the demise, my late brother left a will in which in his recognition that I can take care of his family, he appointed me as one of the executors of his estate.”
The beleaguered DP told the House that in the said Will his late brother directed that the hotel should be sold among other properties and proceeds distributed as per the Will and “I am also listed as a beneficiary together with other persons named therein.”
“In accordance with his instructions, the hotel was sold by the executors to a third party. I do not own the hotel and I have never owned contrary to the accusation in the motion,” he said.
Minority Whip Ms Millie Odhiambo (Suba North) had said the Monday evening interview eliminated any doubt why the DP should be sent parking.
“If the Deputy President had been quiet, he would have carried many people in this House but he did not tame his tongue,” Ms Odhiambo said even as MPs who rose to speak on the motion hit at him saying he was the source of his own misfortunes.
Moving the motion, MP Mutuse, armed with video clips, accused the DP of coercing the sale of his late brother’s property over the past two years.
The Kibwezi West MP also questioned the DP’s statement about transferring his companies to his sons, who reportedly secured a Sh600 million loan.
“I checked the IDs of those sons; they’re in their early 30s. Which Kenyan at 23 can walk into a bank and get that amount?” Mr Mutuse posed.
Kilifi North MP Owen Baya, while seconding the motion, noted the accusations against the DP were weightier than those that led to the removal from office of former Deputy Chief Justice Nancy Baraza.
“There was a time in this country when the Deputy Chief Justice Nancy Baraza was bundled out of office because of an issue that Kenyans thought was not proper – pinching the nose of a security guard. But here we have a Deputy President who has committed sacrilege,” said Mr Baya.
He added; “we have a DP who has called people names, a DP who has called a Member of Parliament a prostitute, a DP who has amassed wealth which cannot be accounted for.”
According to Mr Baya, just like Ms Baraza was bundled out of the office, the Deputy President must also be bundled out of office for impropriety.
This even as Nyandarua County Woman Representative Faith Gitau accused the DP of having no respect for women and “can never work with women.”
“The DP has lowered the respect and status expected from such a high office. It disturbs me when DP is at the forefront demeaning women in leadership, he has made scathing attacks on a woman of the caliber of the High Court Judge and he has been attacking women MPs, me included,” said Ms Gitau.
Those who tried to defend the DP did not have it easy. For instance, Kitui Central MP Dr Makali Mulu ran into trouble with his colleagues when he dismissed the impeachment motion.
“Let us be honest with ourselves. A majority of you are doing exactly what is being described in this motion,” Mr Makali said amidst murmurs from members.
Ugenya MP David Ochieng’ argued that the vote against the DP has nothing to do with the Mount Kenya region “or the people from Central Kenya.”
“It has to be clear that we are not impeaching Mount Kenya. Mr Gachagua has alienated Mount Kenya from the rest of the country,” said the Ugenya MP.
There were light moments in the House after Tetu MP Geoffrey Wandeto tried to withdraw his signature but was swiftly told off by Speaker Wetang’ula. The lawmaker had written to the Speaker communicating his intention.
“I received a letter from Geoffrey Wandeto purporting to withdraw his signature. I want to invite him to read the Standing Orders that are very clear.”
“Once you append your signature to a Special Motion, you have crossed the Rubicon and you cannot withdraw that signature,” the Speaker notified the Tetu MP.
