Gachagua's Legal Team Questions Missing Pages in High Court Judgment

A dispute has emerged over the completeness of a High Court judgment in a constitutional petition involving former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, after his legal team claimed that pages are missing from the version circulated to the parties.

The petition was heard by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Eric Ogola, Anthony Mrima and Freda Mugambi. The court delivered its decision on 8 June 2026 during proceedings that lasted about ten hours. 

According to lawyers present, Justice Ogola stated that the bench was issuing a 350-page judgment. However, the written version later provided to the parties contained 286 pages, leaving a difference of 64 pages.

In a letter to the court registry, Gachagua’s lawyers questioned whether the judgment on record is complete and authentic. They argued that any inconsistency between the decision delivered in open court and the document later circulated raises concerns about transparency in constitutional cases involving multiple petitioners and public institutions, including the National Assembly and its Speaker.

The issue has attracted wider interest following comments by People’s Liberation Party leader Martha Karua. She expressed concern about what she described as contradictory and inconsistent decisions in politically significant cases. 

Referring to her experience in the 2017 Nyeri gubernatorial election petition, Karua said the courts acknowledged procedural shortcomings and missing materials but nevertheless dismissed her case. The High Court registry is now under pressure to explain the discrepancy and determine whether it resulted from a clerical error, a procedural irregularity or a substantive omission.