The recent release of Nderitu Gachagua's nine-page will has sparked a heated debate, with Rigathi Gachagua's brother's family laying bare the details of the property distribution. The will, signed a week before Nderitu's death in 2017, has been at the center of a contentious dispute, with President William Ruto accusing Rigathi of manipulating it to disenfranchise widows and orphans. The Gachagua family, however, is fighting back, demanding an apology from five relatives and highlighting the will's fairness and transparency.
One of the key points of contention is the will's distribution of Nderitu's substantial estate. The family chairman, Johnson Kibara Gachagua, emphasizes that the will was meticulously crafted and executed, with witnesses present. He argues that the claims of Nderitu's weakness at the time of signing are baseless, as evidenced by the witnesses' signatures. Kibara also points out that the will's distribution of assets, including a house in Karen, two houses in Nyeri and Karen, and the ancestral home, was fair and in line with Nderitu's wishes.
The family's fightback includes a paid-up newspaper advertisement detailing the inheritance amounts, with the highest cash inheritance at Sh64.8 million and the lowest at Sh1.3 million. This distribution is further supported by the sale of Nderitu's assets, generating Sh648.8 million, which was then divided among 23 beneficiaries. Additionally, nearly Sh1 billion was utilized to settle his outstanding debts at the time of his demise.
Kibara also addresses the question of why no one challenged the court process that led to the appointment of successors. He argues that the executors, including Rigathi, were diligent in managing the estate and paying out liabilities, and that no one raised any objections during the initial six-month report period. The family chairman suggests that the current controversy is politically motivated, aimed at diminishing Rigathi's popularity in the Mt Kenya region.
Furthermore, the family questions the complainants' awareness of the estoppel law, which prevents individuals from going back on their word once they have accepted assets. By taking the properties issued in the will, the family argues that they are bound by the legal principles and cannot now claim forgery. Kibara also highlights the will's praise in Kenya's legal circles for its comprehensive approach to property distribution.
In conclusion, the Gachagua family's response to the will dispute is a strong defense of its fairness and transparency. They emphasize the will's proper execution, the equitable distribution of assets, and the lack of valid objections during the initial stages. The family's fightback also raises questions about the political motivations behind the controversy and the complainants' understanding of legal principles. As the dispute continues, the family's efforts to protect Nderitu's legacy and ensure a just distribution of his estate remain a focal point of the debate.
