[2013] KEHC 6372 (KLR)
The court found that the Respondent, Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, followed due process and acted within the law in determining the proper nominee for the Federal Party of Kenya's Gender Top Up slot in Bungoma County Assembly. The Applicant failed to provide evidence substantiating her claims that...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 6372 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission; Respondent: Federal Party of Kenya; Respondent: Caroline Wachu; Applicant: Everlyne Nasipwondi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Judicial Review 220 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review of Administrative Action, Electoral Nominations, Procedural Fairness, Party List Disputes
- 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
Republic
Applicant
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Federal Party of Kenya
Respondent
Caroline Wachu
Respondent
Everlyne Nasipwondi
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission acted illegally, unreasonably, irrationally, or procedurally unfairly in handling the nomination dispute.
- 2 Whether the 2nd Interested Party was properly nominated to the Bungoma County Assembly by the Federal Party of Kenya.
- 3 Whether the Applicant was denied a fair hearing by the Respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Respondent, Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, followed due process and acted within the law in determining the proper nominee for the Federal Party of Kenya's Gender Top Up slot in Bungoma County Assembly. The Applicant failed to provide evidence substantiating her claims that the 2nd Interested Party was not a bona fide member of the party or that the nomination process was flawed. The court held that there was nothing illegal, unreasonable, or procedurally unfair in the Respondent's actions or decision. Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed for lack of merit.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
JUDICIAL REVIEW DIVISION
JR CASE NO. 220 OF 2013
REPUBLIC....................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
THE INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL
AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION............................RESPONDENT
FEDERAL PARTY OF KENYA......................1ST INTERESTED PARTY
CAROLINE WACHU ..................................2ND INTERESTED PARTY
EX-PARTE
EVERLYNE NASIPWONDI
JUDGMENT
The Ex-parte Applicant, Everlyne Nasipwondi was a complainant in Complaint No. IEBC/NDRC/ PL/207/2013–EVERLYNE NASIPWONDI before the Disputes Resolution Committee (the Committee) set up by the Respondent, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission to hear disputes arising from nominations to county assemblies by political parties in respect of the seats contemplated by Article 177(1)(b) and (c) of the Constitution. The dispute arose out of nominations by Federal Party of Kenya (FPK) to Bungoma County Assembly.
Before the Committee the Applicant had claimed that Caroline Wachu, the 2nd Interested Party who had been nominated by the FPK, was not a member of the party and was a resident of the Bungoma County. The 2nd Interested Party’s response was that she was a member of the party and married in Bungoma. The Organizing Secretary of the 1st Interested Party confirmed that she was indeed a bona fide member of the party. In a ruling delivered on 7th June, 2013 the Committee found that the Applicant had not adduced any evidence to support her allegations and that the allegations had been rebutted by the interested parties. Her complaint was therefore dismissed.
The Applicant is now before us and in these proceedings she faults the Respondent for failing to hear her on merit and giving priority to the 2nd Interested Party, whose name was not on the party list published in the Daily Nation of 16th May, 2013.
The Respondent and the interested parties opposed the application and submitted that the Respondent acted in accordance with the law in reaching its decision that the 2nd Interested Party was the proper nominee picked by the 1st Interested Party for its Gender Top Up slot in Bungoma County.
We have considered the depositions herein and find that:-
Judicial Review comes to the aid of a claimant where it is proved that the actions of a public body were illegal, unreasonable, irrational or procedurally unfair.
The Respondent has through the replying affidavit of its Legal Officer, Mr. Moses Kipkogei explained at length the procedure followed before it was concluded that the 2nd Interested Party was the proper nominee for the 1st Interested Party’s slot in Bungoma County Assembly.
The Ruling of the Respondent is self-explanatory and we find nothing illegal, unreasonable and unfair about it. The Respondent also complied with the law in picking the 2nd Interested Party.
For the reasons afore-stated, we find that this application has no merit. The application is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi this 12th day of July, 2013
MUMBI NGUGI, D. S. MAJANJA, W. K. KORIR,
JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE