[2013] KESC 17 (KLR)
The Supreme Court declined to entertain the supplicant's prayers because she did not have party status in any of the consolidated presidential election petitions. The Court found no basis to conclude that her prayers would assist or operate in aid of the urgent trial process. The Court emphasized the need for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KESC 17 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Gladwell Wathoni Otieno; Applicant: Zahid Rajan; Respondent: Ahmed Issack Hassan; Respondent: Independent Electoral And Boundaries Commission; Respondent: Uhuru Kenyatta; Respondent: William Samoei Ruto; Applicant: Raila Odinga
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Court Station
- Supreme Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 4 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Presidential Election Petition / Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- Application by non-party declined; prayers remitted to Registrar.
- Judges
- WM Mutunga, PK Tunoi, MK Ibrahim, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu
- Legal Topics
- Presidential Election Petition, Locus Standii, Party Status, Interlocutory Applications
- 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
Gladwell Wathoni Otieno
Applicant
Zahid Rajan
Applicant
Ahmed Issack Hassan
Respondent
Independent Electoral And Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Uhuru Kenyatta
Respondent
William Samoei Ruto
Respondent
Raila Odinga
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Presidential Election Petition / Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a non-party (supplicant) can be granted audience or reliefs in a presidential election petition.
- 2 Whether the supplicant's prayers would aid the trial process in the context of urgent presidential election petitions.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court declined to entertain the supplicant's prayers because she did not have party status in any of the consolidated presidential election petitions. The Court found no basis to conclude that her prayers would assist or operate in aid of the urgent trial process. The Court emphasized the need for efficiency and focus in the determination of presidential election petitions, given their constitutional urgency. Consequently, the prayers were not entertained and were instead remitted to the Registrar for appropriate administrative action.
Court Disposition
Application by non-party declined; prayers remitted to Registrar.
Orders
- The prayers by the supplicant are not entertained by the Supreme Court.
- The prayers are remitted to the Registrar for appropriate orders on March 26, 2013 at 9:00 am.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
46 paragraphs
Otieno & 2 others v Hassan & 5 others (Petition 4 & 5 of 2013 (Consolidated)) [2013] KESC 17 (KLR) (25 March 2013) (Order)
GLADWELL WATHONI OTIENO & ANOTHER V AHMED ISSACK HASSAN & 3 OTHERS[2013]eKLR
Neutral citation: [2013] KESC 17 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Supreme Court of Kenya
Petition 4 & 5 of 2013 (Consolidated)
WM Mutunga, CJ & P, PK Tunoi, MK Ibrahim, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala & N Ndungu, SCJJ
March 25, 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 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 declines to consider application by a non-party in the presidential election petition for failing to aid the trial process.
Reported by Moses Rotich
Held It emerged that the supplicant did not have party status in any of the petitions. There was no impression that the supplicant’s prayers will operate in aid of the trial process for the petitions before the court, which, it was apparent, had a clear urgency.
Orders The prayers in question were not entertained, but remitted to the Registrar for appropriate orders on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 at 9. 00 am.
Citations CasesNone referred toStatutesNone referred toAdvocatesNone mentioned
Order
Two Prayers by Nazlin Umar 1. It emerges that the supplicant does not have party status in any of the petitions herein. We do not gain the impression that the supplicant’s prayers will operate in aid of the trial process for the petitions before the court, which, it is apparent, have a clear urgency.
2. Consequently, we order that the prayers in question shall not be entertained now, but shall be remitted to the Registrar for appropriate orders on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 at 9. 00 am.
3. Orders accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013. .......................................W.M. MUTUNGACHIEF JUSTICE & PRESIDENT OF THE SUPREME COURT.......................................P.K. TUNOIJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT.......................................J.B. OJWANGJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT.......................................M.K. IBRAHIMJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT.......................................S.C. WANJALAJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT.......................................N.S. NDUNGUJUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURTI certify that this is a true Copy of the original.REGISTRARSUPREME COURT OF KENYA