[2013] KESC 3 (KLR)
The Supreme Court, recognizing the immense public interest and media scrutiny surrounding the presidential election petitions, held that the integrity and authority of the judicial process must be preserved. To this end, the Court directed that all parties, their agents, supporters, and advisors must refrain from...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KESC 3 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Moses Kiarie Kuria; Applicant: Denis Njue Itumbi; Applicant: Flowrence Jematiah Sergon; Respondent: Issack Hassan; Respondent: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission; Applicant: Gladwell Wathoni Otieno; Applicant: Zahid Rajan; Respondent: Ahmed Issack Hassan; Respondent: Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta; Respondent: William Samoei Ruto; Applicant: Raila Odinga
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Court Station
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 3 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition / Directions Before Hearing
- Outcome
- Directions issued for the conduct of parties, advocates, and media in presidential election petitions.
- Judges
- WM Mutunga, PK Tunoi, MK Ibrahim, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala, NS Ndungu
- Legal Topics
- Presidential Election Challenge, Role of Advocates, Media Conduct, Judicial Authority, Pre Trial Directions
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Moses Kiarie Kuria
Applicant
Denis Njue Itumbi
Applicant
Flowrence Jematiah Sergon
Applicant
Issack Hassan
Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Gladwell Wathoni Otieno
Applicant
Zahid Rajan
Applicant
Ahmed Issack Hassan
Respondent
Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
Respondent
William Samoei Ruto
Respondent
Raila Odinga
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Directions Before Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 What is the role of advocates in relation to the conduct of their clients in presidential election petitions.
- 2 What is the role of the media in relation to their conduct in presidential election petitions.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court, recognizing the immense public interest and media scrutiny surrounding the presidential election petitions, held that the integrity and authority of the judicial process must be preserved. To this end, the Court directed that all parties, their agents, supporters, and advisors must refrain from discussing or prosecuting the merits of the petitions outside the courtroom. Advocates on record bear the responsibility of advising their clients on the consequences of any conduct or statements that could undermine the Court's authority. The media, while fulfilling its constitutional mandate to inform the public, must do so in a fair, impartial, and responsible manner, strictly...
Court Disposition
Directions issued for the conduct of parties, advocates, and media in presidential election petitions.
Orders
- Petitioners, respondents, and their agents, supporters, or advisors are directed to desist from prosecuting the merits of their cases in any forum other than the court.
- Advocates on record must advise their clients about the consequences of conduct or statements that can undermine the authority of the court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
73 paragraphs
Kuria & 5 others v Hassan & 5 others (Petition 3, 4 & 5 of 2013 (Consolidated)) [2013] KESC 3 (KLR) (Election Petitions) (20 March 2013) (Directions)
MOSES KIARIE KURIA & 2 OTHERS V ISSACK HASSAN & ANOTHER[2013]eKLR
Neutral citation: [2013] KESC 3 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Supreme Court of Kenya
Election Petitions
Petition 3, 4 & 5 of 2013 (Consolidated)
WM Mutunga, CJ & P, PK Tunoi, MK Ibrahim, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala & NS Ndungu, SCJJ
March 20, 2013
Between
Moses Kiarie Kuria
1st Petitioner
Denis Njue Itumbi
2nd Petitioner
Flowrence Jematiah Sergon
3rd Petitioner
and
Issack Hassan
1st Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
2nd Respondent
As consolidated with
Petition 4 of 2013
Between
Gladwell Wathoni Otieno
1st Petitioner
Zahid Rajan
2nd Petitioner
and
Ahmed Issack Hassan
1st Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
2nd Respondent
Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
3rd Respondent
William Samoei Ruto
4th Respondent
As consolidated with
Petition 5 of 2013
Between
Raila Odinga
Petitioner
and
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
1st Respondent
Ahmed Issack Hassan
2nd Respondent
Uhuru Kenyatta
3rd Respondent
William Samoei Ruto
4th Respondent
Supreme Court issues directions for the presidential election petitions challenging the outcome of the March 4, 2013 presidential elections
The Supreme Court issued directions to be complied with in the presidential election petitions challenging the outcome of the March 4, 2013 presidential elections.
Reported by Kakai Toili
Electoral Law- election petitions - presidential election petitions - what was the role of advocates in relation to the conduct of their clients in presidential election petitions - what was the role of the media in relation to their conduct in presidential election petitions.
Brief facts Three petitions challenging the validity of the March 4, 2013 presidential elections were filed in the Supreme Court. The petitions had elicited immense public interest and generated endless media coverage and commentary. The court issued directions to be followed before the petitions were determined.
Issues
What was the role of advocates in relation to the conduct of their clients in presidential election petitions.
What was the role of the media in relation to their conduct in presidential election petitions.
Held
The court was ready and prepared to hear and determine the petitions on the basis of the Constitution, the applicable law, and the evidence. In the interests of justice and for the efficient, effective, transparent and impartial determination of the petitions, the court issued the following directions:
The court was fully seized of the petitions challenging the presidential elections. Towards that end, the petitioners and respondents, and their agents, supporters or advisors were directed to desist from prosecuting the merits of their cases in any forum other than the court.
It was the responsibility of the advocates on record to advise their clients in the cases about the consequences of conduct or statements that could undermine the authority of the court.
While the media had to, in keeping with its constitutional mandate, continue to keep the public informed about the progress of the petitions, media houses and individual journalists and commentators were to perform their functions in a fair, impartial and responsible manner. The media was required to strictly adhere to the code of conduct for the practice of journalism in Kenya at all times.
A comprehensive checklist of documents and relevant matters would be prepared and issued by the court to the advocates on record, in time for the pre-trial conference, scheduled to take place on the March 25, 2013. Upon receipt of the checklist, parties would be required to prepare and file their responses in the Supreme Court Registry on or before the March 23, 2013.
Directions issued.
Citations CasesNone referred toStatutesKenyaConstitution of Kenya, 2010 In general - (Cited)AdvocatesNone mentioned
Directions
1. Three petitions challenging the validity of the just concluded presidential elections have been filed in the Supreme Court. The petitions have, not surprisingly, elicited immense public interest and generated endless media coverage and commentary. The court is ready and prepared to hear and determine the petitions on the basis of theConstitution, the applicable law, and the evidence. In the interests of justice, and for the efficient, effective, transparent and impartial determination of the petitions, the court hereby issues the following directions. 1. The court is now fully seized of the petitions challenging the presidential elections. Towards this end, the petitioners and respondents, and their agents, supporters or advisors are directed to desist from prosecuting the merits of their cases in any forum other than this court.
2. It is the responsibility of the advocates on record to advise their clients in these cases, about the consequences of conduct or statements that can undermine the authority of this court.
3. While the media must, in keeping with its constitutional mandate, continue to keep the public informed about the progress of these petitions, media houses and individual journalists and commentators are to perform their functions in a fair, impartial and responsible manner. The media is required to strictly adhere to the code of conduct for the practice of journalism in Kenya at all times.
4. A comprehensive checklist of documents and relevant matter will be prepared and issued by the court to the advocates on record, in time for the pre-trial conference, scheduled to take place on the March 25, 2013. Upon receipt of the said checklist, parties shall be required to prepare and file their responses in the Supreme Court registry on or before the March 23, 2013.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013. ..............................W MUTUNGACHIEF JUSTICE & PRESIDENT OFTHE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................PK TUNOIJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................MK IBRAHIMJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................JB OJWANGJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................SC WANJALAJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................NS NDUNGUJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYAI certify that this is a true Copy of the originalREGISTRARSUPREME COURT OF KENYA