Cardiologist Dr. Daniel Kibuka Gikonyo has faced cross-examination in court after filing an affidavit supporting former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua in a case where he is challenging his impeachment, arguing that he was denied a fair hearing due to his medical condition.
Dr. Gikonyo defended his medical assessment, telling the court that Gachagua presented symptoms consistent with a possible heart attack, including chest pains that required urgent clinical attention and monitoring.
He said the medical team applied standard emergency protocols upon examination to rule out serious cardiac complications.
“The presentation warranted immediate admission and close observation to determine the extent of the condition and eliminate the possibility of a cardiac event,” he told the court.
The doctor further stated that stress was among the factors considered during the assessment, noting that the patient required further tests to establish the seriousness of the symptoms.
Gachagua has moved to court challenging the impeachment process, arguing that proceedings continued despite his medical condition, thereby denying him a fair opportunity to fully defend himself.
During cross-examination, Dr. Gikonyo maintained that he had already clarified concerns raised over his medical documents, insisting that the alleged discrepancies did not amount to inconsistencies.
He told the court that the records in question related to different occurrences and timelines in the treatment of the former Deputy President, urging the court to interpret them within their proper clinical context.
“The issues raised have already been addressed in my testimony. They do not represent contradictions, but different clinical encounters,” he maintained.
However, lawyers pressed him on why some of the explanations were not included in his original affidavit, arguing that key clarifications only emerged during oral testimony.
A further point of contention arose over patient identification, after it emerged that some medical documents bore only the initials “R.G” alongside a passport number, without the full name.
Counsel argued that the initials alone were insufficient to conclusively identify the patient.
In response, Dr. Gikonyo admitted that the initials “R.G” could technically refer to another individual, but maintained that the omission of the full name was intentional to protect patient confidentiality.
He, however, clarified to the court that in this case, the initials “R.G” referred to Rigathi Gachagua.
The matter is ongoing as the court continues to weigh the medical evidence alongside arguments over the fairness of the impeachment proceedings.
