The Senate impeachment trial of Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua was thrown into disarray for hours on Thursday after the DP suddenly fell ill before taking the stand.
The unexpected development prompted Speaker Amason Kingi to adjourn proceedings until 5pm to allow the DP's legal team, led by senior counsel Paul Muite, to locate their client.
Dropping the bombshell, Senior Counsel Paul Muite informed the House that DP Gachagua was seriously ill in hospital and that he was therefore unable to reach the 59-year-old.
Mr Gachagua had failed to appear before the Senate for the afternoon session where he was to take the stand as the defence's sole witness.
Mr Muite said they had received information that the DP had fallen ill and was currently in hospital.
"We are anxiously waiting for the Deputy President. Let me make an enquiry as to where he is. We certainly want to call the witness," said Mr Muite.
"The sad reality is that the DP has been taken ill and as I speak he is in hospital. My suggestion is that you give me the rest of the day to check on his situation and come back here at 5pm after you have seen him and spoken to the doctor," he added.
When the House resumed at 5pm, Mr Muite asked that the proceedings be adjourned until Tuesday next week, saying the DP was suffering from severe chest pains and needed complete rest for the time being.
"I was able to contact the doctors at the Karen Hospital who are attending to the Deputy President. Because of his condition, I was not able to speak to him directly on the instructions of his doctor. He said he needs to have complete rest for the time being. I have been informed by his doctors that he is currently suffering from severe chest pains," Mr Muite said.
DP Gachagua is suffering intense chest pains - Muite
In making his application, the Senior Counsel cited Article 145(6)(b) of the Constitution and asked the House to give the DP an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the dictates of a fair trial.
The provision states that if a select committee set up to investigate allegations of removal of a DP from office by impeachment reports that the particulars of any allegation against the DP have been substantiated, the Senate shall, after giving the DP an opportunity to be heard, vote on the impeachment charges.
"The provision doesn't have a time limit of 10 days. Give the deputy president a few days until Tuesday to come and defend himself," he said.
The National Assembly, however, called for the application to be struck out, saying the proceedings were time-bound and should proceed as there was no guarantee that the DP would be able to appear before the Senate on Tuesday.
"The opportunity to be heard does not have to be oral. The rules of this House allow for parties appearing to be represented, to appear in person or to file documents," said National Assembly lawyer Eric Gumbo.
"These proceedings are time-bound. It's not about the situation the DP finds itself in, it's about the Senate complying with the provisions of the Constitution that it must make a decision within a certain timeframe," added Senior Counsel James Orengo.
Mr Gachagua was due to take the stand as the sole witness in defence of his continued hold on the country's second most powerful position, but something had to give.
The DP is facing 11 grounds for the proposed impeachment, but the allegations that dominated the trial included his "shareholding" remarks, interference in the procurement process of Kemsa's Sh3.7 billion mosquito net tender, money laundering and corruption.
Mr Gachagua is accused of gross violations of the Constitution, including promoting ethnic discrimination and undermining national unity through divisive public statements.
This comes after the DP compared the country to a company with shareholders and that only those with shares should benefit from government jobs and development projects depending on how they vote in the 2022 elections.
Allegations of using his office to intimidate Kemsa officials during the procurement process for the supply of mosquito nets stuck out like a sore thumb during the session.
Earlier in the day, former Kemsa acting chief executive officer Andrew Mulwa gave a blow-by-blow account of how DP Gachagua tried to interfere in the Sh3.7 billion tender process by demanding the return of a bid bond from a company, Crystal Limited - a company owned by his sons.
Mr Mulwa detailed how the DP's alleged interference led to delays in the distribution of the nets, loss of money and the sacking of a principal secretary and suspension of some senior Kemsa officials.
"I had never received a call from anyone above my minister, and this was the first time I had received a call from the deputy president asking for a document that was being investigated by the EACC. I felt coerced and had to leave the business I was doing and go to the EACC and sit for five hours waiting for them to release the tender bond. That explains the pressure I felt as a public servant," said Mr Mulwa.
"This was a matter that was under investigation and for the DP to push for the return of the bid bond, he was interfering with the investigation," he added.
Kibwezi West MP Mwengi Mutuse, who moved the impeachment motion in the National Assembly, also showed how the DP was involved in a web of secrecy and conspiracy to allegedly commit money laundering and corruption.
He questioned how Mr Gachagua's wealth grew exponentially from Sh800 million before the 2022 elections to Sh5.2 billion through listed companies and properties linked to him.
The MP argued that it was suspicious that the DP's sons were the directors of his late brother's properties and not his children.
"We know all the tricks used to hide ownership. I invite you to see the web of secrecy and conspiracy. These are white-collar crimes perpetrated by clever people and sometimes it is difficult to get evidence but overall it points to money laundering and corruption," said Mr Mutuse.
Mr Mutuse also said the DP's scathing attack on the country's National Intelligence Service was a failure, pointing to the incompetence of National Intelligence Service chief Noordin Haji.
"Imagine if someone was a member of Al Shabaab and the DP stood up and said the intelligence system had collapsed, wouldn't that be the right time to strike? That was the risk the country was taking," he said.
But the DP's defence team argued against the allegations, saying the shareholding or company comment was merely a tool to explain the agreements signed by the Kenya Kwanza parties.
"In law, there is no secrecy when crimes are committed or the constitution is violated. The DP was just following the mentorship of the man who occupied the office before him and did not reveal any secrets," said lawyer Tom Macharia.
Mr Macharia was responding to a statement by National Assembly lawyer Muthomi Thiankolu that the oath of office of the DP prohibits the holder of the office from disclosing matters relating to national security.
EACC deputy chief executive officer Abdi Ahmed Mohamud told the House that their investigations showed that the Sh3.7 billion Kemsa tender was marred by serious procurement challenges, the most important of which was the change of specifications to suit Shobikaa Impex Limited with a local agent known as Crystal Kenya Limited.
"That tender was mishandled and I don't want to say why, but from the looks of it, there must have been pressure from somewhere. You can draw two conclusions, either the officials were bribed or there was pressure from somewhere," said Mr Mohamud.
"We don't have any evidence that the DP influenced any tender. What we have is the link between Crystal Limited and the DP. From the documents we have, it is clear that the directors of the company are the two sons of the DP and that is the link between the DP and this particular company," he added.
