March 19 Showdown: Judiciary Set to Decide on Kindiki’s Political Future

A three-judge bench of the High Court is set to deliver its ruling on March 19, 2026, in a petition seeking the removal of Deputy President Kithure Kindiki from office.

The application was filed by petitioner Joseph Aura, who is asking the court to determine whether there are sufficient legal grounds to warrant the Deputy President’s removal.

The case has drawn significant public attention, given its potential constitutional and political implications.

The bench, constituted to hear the matter due to its weight and public interest, has been considering arguments from both the petitioner and the Deputy President’s legal team.

Aura argues that the court has the mandate to intervene where there are alleged constitutional violations by a state officer, including the Deputy President.

He maintains that the application raises substantial constitutional questions that require judicial interpretation.

On the other hand, lawyers representing Kindiki have urged the court to dismiss the petition, terming it legally untenable and politically motivated.

They argue that the Constitution clearly outlines the procedure for removing a Deputy President from office, primarily through an impeachment process initiated in the National Assembly and subsequently considered by the Senate.

Also Read

• March 7 Bombshell: Orengo Claims ODM-UDA Pact Is About to Explode
• 107,000 Health Workers to Receive FREE Comprehensive Medical Cover Starting July 1
• Oburu Oginga Breaks Silence: Why Women Hold the Key to ODM’s Future
• March 19 Showdown: Judiciary Set to Decide on Kindiki’s Political Future
• Murkomen Defends Ruto: Why Junior Officers Are the Heart of the Bottom-Up Agenda

According to the defense, the judiciary should not be used to circumvent the constitutional framework.

Legal analysts observing the case note that the ruling could clarify the extent to which courts can entertain petitions seeking the removal of top executive officials outside the parliamentary impeachment process.

Some experts say the decision may set an important precedent on separation of powers and the limits of judicial intervention in political questions.

The matter comes at a time of heightened political activity across the country, with various factions closely watching the developments.

Although the petition does not directly involve Parliament at this stage, its outcome could influence future attempts to challenge high-ranking state officers through the courts.

Deputy President Kindiki, who has maintained a relatively low profile on the matter, has previously stated in other forums that he remains focused on delivering on his mandate and serving the public.

His allies have dismissed the petition as a distraction, expressing confidence that the court will uphold constitutional order.

For Joseph Aura, the March 19 ruling represents a critical moment in his legal challenge. Should the court allow the petition to proceed or find merit in the application, it could open the door to further legal battles.

Conversely, if the bench dismisses the case, it may reaffirm the centrality of Parliament in handling impeachment matters.

All eyes will now be on the High Court as it prepares to render a decision that could carry significant constitutional weight.