[2022] KESC 42 (KLR)

[2022] KESC 42 (KLR)

The Supreme Court held that applications for scrutiny, access to technology, and recount in presidential election petitions must be specific, justified, and practicable within the strict constitutional timelines. The Court reaffirmed that requests amounting to fishing expeditions or seeking evidence not already...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KESC 42 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Youth Advocacy for Africa (YAA); Applicant: Peter Kirika; Applicant: Khelef Khalifa; Applicant: George Osewe; Applicant: Ruth Mumbi; Applicant: Grace Kamau; Applicant: Raila Amolo Odinga; Applicant: Martha Wangari Karua; Respondent: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission; Respondent: Wafula Chebukati; Respondent: Juliana Whonge Cherera; Respondent: Justus Nyangaya; Respondent: Irene Masit; Respondent: Francis Wanderi; Respondent: Prof. Abdi Yakub Guliye; Respondent: Boya Molu; Respondent: William Samoei Ruto; Respondent: Gachagua Rigathi; Respondent: Hon. Attorney General of Kenya; Respondent: The Chairperson of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission; Respondent: Wanyonyi Wafula Chebukati; Respondent: Francis Wandeti; Respondent: Irene Massit
Court
Supreme Court
Court Station
Supreme Court of Kenya
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Election Petition E002 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Scrutiny, Access to Technology, and Recount
Outcome
Application partly allowed.
Judges
MK Koome, PM Mwilu, MK Ibrahim, SC Wanjala, N Ndungu, I Lenaola, W Ouko
Legal Topics
Scrutiny of Election Materials, Access to Electoral Technology, Recount of Votes, Third Party Disclosure, Timelines in Presidential Petitions, Burden of Proof in Election Disputes
Source Language
en
Election Petitions Constitutional Law Administrative Law Scrutiny of Election Materials Access to Electoral Technology Recount of Votes Third Party Disclosure Timelines in Presidential Petitions +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Youth Advocacy for Africa (YAA)

Applicant

Peter Kirika

Applicant

Khelef Khalifa

Applicant

George Osewe

Applicant

Ruth Mumbi

Applicant

Grace Kamau

Applicant

Raila Amolo Odinga

Applicant

Martha Wangari Karua

Applicant

Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission

Respondent

Wafula Chebukati

Respondent

Juliana Whonge Cherera

Respondent

Justus Nyangaya

Respondent

Irene Masit

Respondent

Francis Wanderi

Respondent

Prof. Abdi Yakub Guliye

Respondent

Boya Molu

Respondent

William Samoei Ruto

Respondent

Gachagua Rigathi

Respondent

Hon. Attorney General of Kenya

Respondent

The Chairperson of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission

Respondent

Wanyonyi Wafula Chebukati

Respondent

Francis Wandeti

Respondent

Irene Massit

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Election Petition / Ruling on Interlocutory Applications for Scrutiny, Access to Technology, and Recount

  1. 1 What criteria should courts employ in determining applications for scrutiny and recount of election results?
  2. 2 Whether the Supreme Court can grant orders to direct the production of contracts with terms of reference between third parties not enjoined in the presidential election petition.
  3. 3 Whether an order allowing for the filing of further affidavits arising from the scrutiny exercise can issue given the strict timelines applicable to a presidential election petition.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that applications for scrutiny, access to technology, and recount in presidential election petitions must be specific, justified, and practicable within the strict constitutional timelines. The Court reaffirmed that requests amounting to fishing expeditions or seeking evidence not already pleaded in the petition would be rejected. The Court found that many of the documents and information sought were already in the custody of the court or in the public domain, and thus declined those prayers. The Court also declined to grant orders for access to all KIEMS kits and servers for all Constituency Tallying Centers, finding such requests unrealistic given the time...

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed.

Orders

  • IEBC to provide applicants with copies of its technology system security policy, including password policy, password matrix, owners of system administration passwords, system users and levels of access, workflow charts, and APIs, subject to security considerations.
  • IEBC to give applicants supervised access to any server(s) at the National Tallying Centre for storing and transmitting voting information, forensically imaged to capture a copy of Form 34C.