[2013] KEHC 2707 (KLR)
The court declined to grant the preservatory order sought by the applicant because the certificate of urgency was not accompanied by a formal application or supporting affidavit, rendering it procedurally defective and unsupported by evidence. Furthermore, the Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 2707 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Richard N. Kalembe Ndile; Respondent: Dr Patrick Musimba Mweu; Respondent: Returning Officer Kibwezi West Constituency; Respondent: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Election Petition 1 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition / Interlocutory Application (certificate of Urgency) Prior to Hearing
- Outcome
- Application for preservatory order declined; no orders issued on the certificate of urgency.
- Judges
- DAS Majanja
- Legal Topics
- Preservation of Evidence, Ballot Box Custody, Interlocutory Orders, Election Procedure
- 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
Richard N. Kalembe Ndile
Applicant
Dr Patrick Musimba Mweu
Respondent
Returning Officer Kibwezi West Constituency
Respondent
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Interlocutory Application (certificate of Urgency) Prior to Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should issue a preservatory order for the custody of ballot boxes pending the hearing of the election petition.
- 2 Whether a certificate of urgency without a supporting application or affidavit can warrant judicial intervention.
- 3 Whether the Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules 2013 provide for conservatory orders regarding ballot boxes.
Ratio Decidendi
The court declined to grant the preservatory order sought by the applicant because the certificate of urgency was not accompanied by a formal application or supporting affidavit, rendering it procedurally defective and unsupported by evidence. Furthermore, the Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules 2013 already provide a mechanism for the custody of ballot boxes, specifically requiring the Commission to deliver them to the Registrar before trial. There is no legal basis for the court to intervene by issuing a conservatory order in the absence of a proper application and supporting evidence, nor is there a rule permitting such an order in these circumstances. The...
Court Disposition
Application for preservatory order declined; no orders issued on the certificate of urgency.
Orders
- The application for a preservatory order regarding the ballot boxes is declined.
- No oral arguments or further applications on this matter will be entertained.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
36 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Machakos
Election Petition 1 of 2013
[if !mso]> <style> v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ELECTION
FOR KIBWEZI WEST CONSTITUENCY
BETWEEN
RICHARD N. KALEMBE NDILE.............................................................................PETITIONER
AND
DR PATRICK MUSIMBA MWEU ..............................................................1ST RESPONDENT
RETURNING OFFICERKIBWEZI WEST CONSTITUENCY....................2ND RESPONDENT
INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL ANDBOUNDARIES COMMISSION......3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Certificate of Urgency dated 5th June 2013 filed on behalf of the petitioner has been brought to my attention. It states as follows;
I, Makau Kamolo an advocate of the High Court of Kenya do hereby certify that this matter need to be placed before the trial judge immediately for the following reasons:-
(1)That the 2nd and 3rd respondent have for unknown reason commenced transporting the ballot boxes in respect of Kibwezi Constituency parliamentary seat from Makindu 3rd respondents office to Kibwezi at certain unnamed go down.
(2)That the petitioner is apprehensive that the 2nd and 3rd respondents acts are malicious aimed and calculated to destroy evidence purposely to defeat the petitioner herein,
(3)That unless a preservatory order is issued to secure the ballot boxes, the petitioner is bound to suffer irreparably in the event the court will order a recount of votes and the ballot boxes are lost or interfere with.
(4)That there is no security and none is guaranteed at the above stated go down and the ballot boxes may easily get lost.
(5)That there will be no prejudice if an order is issued that the ballot boxes are kept by the Deputy Registrar of this Court as provided for under Rule 21 of the Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules 2013.
I certify there exist an urgent cause to warrant this matter be placed before the trial judge for directions towards preserving the ballot boxes for the ends of Justice which cause the court can act Suo Motu.
2. The certificate of urgency is not accompanied by any application. No affidavit has been sworn to support of the facts set out in the certificate. In other words, the certificate of urgency is not worth the paper it is written on.
3. The hearing of the petition is now scheduled to be heard on 11th June 2013. Rule 21(a) of the Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules 2013 provides as follows;
The Commission shall deliver to the Registrar –
(a)The ballot boxes in respect of the relevant election not less than forty-eight hours before the date fixed by the court for trial...”
4. It is the duty of the Commission to deliver the ballot boxes to the Court and for the court to take custody of them. There is no provision in the Rules for the grant of a conservatory order of the kind alluded and I find no reason to intervene, at least not on the basis of unsubstantiated statements.
5. The court has now given pre-trial directions and as the matter is fixed for hearing on 11th June 2013, I decline to entertain any oral arguments or application on this matter.
DATED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 5th day of June 2013
D.S. MAJANJA
JUDGE
[if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; font-size:10. 0pt;"Calibri","sans-serif";} </style> <![endif]