[2017] KESC 8 (KLR)
The Supreme Court held that the instant petition, brought under article 163(3) of the Constitution and not challenging the election of the President-elect, is not a time-bound petition under article 140. Therefore, it cannot be heard and determined together with presidential election petitions that are subject to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KESC 8 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Institute For Democratic Governance; Respondent: Raila Amolo Odinga; Respondent: Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka; Respondent: Musalia Mudavadi; Respondent: James Aggrey Bob Orengo; Respondent: Moses Wetangula; Respondent: The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Court Station
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Judgment Date
- 14 November 2017
- Case Number
- Election Petition 3 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition / Ruling on Consolidation and Listing
- Outcome
- Ruling deferred; petition removed from 14-day cause list.
- Judges
- DK Maraga, PM Mwilu, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu, I Lenaola
- Legal Topics
- Presidential Election Petitions, Jurisdiction of Supreme Court, Consolidation of Petitions, Timelines for Election Petitions
- Source Language
- english
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Institute For Democratic Governance
Applicant
Raila Amolo Odinga
Respondent
Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka
Respondent
Musalia Mudavadi
Respondent
James Aggrey Bob Orengo
Respondent
Moses Wetangula
Respondent
The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Respondent
The Hon. Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Ruling on Consolidation and Listing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a petition not challenging the election of the President-elect can be heard and determined together with presidential election petitions that are time-bound under article 140 of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the petition under article 163(3) when it does not challenge the election of the President-elect.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that the instant petition, brought under article 163(3) of the Constitution and not challenging the election of the President-elect, is not a time-bound petition under article 140. Therefore, it cannot be heard and determined together with presidential election petitions that are subject to the 14-day determination period. The Court emphasized the constitutional distinction between the two types of petitions and the necessity to adhere strictly to the timelines and procedural requirements set out for presidential election petitions. As a result, the petition was taken out of the cause list for matters to be heard within the 14-day period, and the ruling on the...
Court Disposition
Ruling deferred; petition removed from 14-day cause list.
Orders
- The petition is taken out of the cause list of matters to be heard within the 14-day period for presidential election petitions.
- Ruling on the application for joinder by Jubilee Party and the preliminary objection is deferred to a date to be given on notice.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
46 paragraphs
Institute for Democratic Governance v Odinga & 4 others; Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & another (Interested Parties) (Election Petition 3 of 2017) [2017] KESC 8 (KLR) (Election Petitions) (14 November 2017) (Ruling)
Institute for Democratic Governance v Raila Amolo Odinga & 6 others [2017] eKLR
Neutral citation: [2017] KESC 8 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Supreme Court of Kenya
Election Petitions
Election Petition 3 of 2017
DK Maraga, CJ & P, PM Mwilu, DCJ & VP, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu & I Lenaola, SCJJ
November 14, 2017
Between
Institute For Democratic Governance
Petitioner
and
Raila Amolo Odinga
1st Respondent
Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka
2nd Respondent
Musalia Mudavadi
3rd Respondent
James Aggrey Bob Orengo
4th Respondent
Moses Wetangula
5th Respondent
and
The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Interested Party
The Hon. Attorney General
Interested Party
Presidential election petitions and other Supreme Court petitions cannot be heard and determined together.
Reported by Beryl Ikamari
Civil Practice and Procedure- institution of suits - suits capable of being consolidated or heard and determined together - presidential election petitions and other Supreme Court petitions - whether presidential election petitions which were to be concluded within 14 days could be heard and determined together with other petitions for which similar timelines were not applicable - Constitution of Kenya 2010, article 140 and 163(3).Constitutional Law- presidential election petitions - differences between presidential election petitions and other petitions filed at the Supreme Court - the requirement that presidential election petitions filed at the Supreme Court were to be concluded within 14 days - whether a petition that did not entail a challenge to the election of the President-elect but sought to have it heard at the same time as other petitions which challenged the validity of the presidential elections could be heard and determined together with other petitions which entailed a challenge to the election of the President-elect - Constitution of Kenya 2010, article 140 and 163(3).
Brief facts The petition did not entail a challenge to the election of the President-elect but there were attempts to have it handled at the same time as other petitions which challenged the validity of the presidential elections held on October 26, 2017. The Supreme Court was engaged in hearing two other petitions under article 140 which challenged the election of Hon. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Hon. William Samoei Ruto as President and Deputy President-elect respectively. Those petitions were brought under the provisions of article 140 of the Constitution and they constituted time-bound litigation for which a determination was required within 14 days.Jubilee Party applied to be joined as an interested party in the petition. Meanwhile, counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to hear the petition.
Issues
Whether a petition that did not entail a challenge to the election of the President-elect but court orders were sought to have it heard at the same time as other petitions, which challenged the validity of the presidential elections, could be heard and determined together with other petitions which entailed a challenge to the election of the President-elect.
Held
The instant petition did not challenge the election of the President-elect. It was brought under article 163(3) of the Constitution. It was therefore not a time-bound litigation under the provisions of article 140 of the Constitution which would need to be determined within 14 days. It was therefore not a petition which could be heard together with Petitions Nos 2 and 4 which entailed a challenge to the election of the President-elect. It ought to be taken out of the cause list of matters to be heard within the 14 days which would conclude on December 13, 2017.
There was no time to rule on the application by Jubilee Party or the respondent's preliminary objection. The ruling on the applications made was deferred to a date to be given on notice.
Ruling deferred to a date to be given on notice.
Citations CasesNone mentionedStatutesKenyaConstitution of Kenya articles 140, 163(3) — (Interpreted)AdvocatesNone mentioned
Ruling
1. Jubilee party has applied to be joined as an interested party in this petition. In the course of hearing that application counsel for the respondents have raised a preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of this court to entertain the petition.
2. Today and for the next two (2) to three (3) days, this court will be engaged in hearing two petitions under article 140 challenging the election of Hon Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Hon William Samoei Ruto as President and Deputy President elect respectively.
3. Petitions under article 140 are time bound litigation which must be determined within 14 days as required by clause (3) of that article.
4. This petition does not challenge the election of the President elect. It is brought under article 163(3) of the Constitution. It is therefore not a time bound petition under article 140 of the Constitution that we must hear within 14 days. It cannot therefore be heard along with Petition Nos 2 and 4. It is accordingly taken out of the cause list of matters to be heard between today and the December 13, 2017.
5. We do not even have time to rule on the said application to join Jubilee or on the preliminary objection raised by the respondents. In the circumstances we defer our ruling to a date to be given on notice.It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 14THDAY OF NOVEMBER,2017………………………………………D. K. MARAGACHIEF JUSTICE & PRESIDENT OF THE SUPREME COURT………………………………………P. M. MWILUDEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE & VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE SUPREME COURT………………………………………J. B. OJWANGJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT………………………………………S. C. WANJALAJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT………………………………………N. S. NDUNGUJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT………………………………………I. LENAOLAJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURTI certify that this is a true copy of the originalREGISTRARSUPREME COURT OF KENYA