[2022] KEHC 1101 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 1101 (KLR)

The court declined to grant interim conservatory orders on the basis that such orders, given their serious and far-reaching repercussions, should only be issued after all parties have been substantively heard. The urgency of the matter was acknowledged, but the court emphasized the need for procedural fairness and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 1101 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Salesio Mutuma Thuranira; Applicant: Katiba Institute; Applicant: Africa Centre for Open Governance (AFRICAG); Applicant: Kenya Section of the International Community Jurists; Applicant: Kenya Human Rights Commission; Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General; Respondent: The Speaker National Assembly; Respondent: The Speaker of Senate
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 043 0f 20 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interim Conservatory Orders and Directions for Submissions
Outcome
interim conservatory orders declined; directions issued for expedited hearing
Judges
EM Muchoki, DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Conservatory Orders, Fundamental Rights Enforcement, Political Parties Legislation, Urgent Interim Relief
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Conservatory Orders Fundamental Rights Enforcement Political Parties Legislation Urgent Interim Relief

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salesio Mutuma Thuranira

Applicant

Katiba Institute

Applicant

Africa Centre for Open Governance (AFRICAG)

Applicant

Kenya Section of the International Community Jurists

Applicant

Kenya Human Rights Commission

Applicant

The Hon. Attorney General

Respondent

The Speaker National Assembly

Respondent

The Speaker of Senate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Interim Conservatory Orders and Directions for Submissions

  1. 1 Whether interim conservatory orders should be granted pending substantive hearing of the petition.
  2. 2 Whether the urgency and public interest justify grant of interim relief without full submissions.

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to grant interim conservatory orders on the basis that such orders, given their serious and far-reaching repercussions, should only be issued after all parties have been substantively heard. The urgency of the matter was acknowledged, but the court emphasized the need for procedural fairness and the right of all parties to present their submissions before any interim relief is granted. The court therefore directed strict timelines for the filing and service of submissions and scheduled a prompt hearing to ensure expeditious determination of the conservatory applications.

Court Disposition

interim conservatory orders declined; directions issued for expedited hearing

Orders

  • Oral application for interim conservatory orders is declined.
  • All respondents and interested parties in Petition E043 and E057/2022 and the petitioner and respondents in E109/2022 to file and serve submissions by 28th March, 2022.