NAIROBI, Kenya, Sep 26 — The Supreme Court was on Monday set to deliver a detailed judgement on the August presidential petition giving its reasons for arriving at the conclusions it did on matters of law framed in the suit.
A notice issued by the court’s registry indicated that the judgement by the seven judge bench will be shared via email at 2.30 pm.
The judgement is a follow-up to a summary decision that was issued on September 5 after a 14-day hearing.
In its abridged ruling, the court unanimously upheld the election of President William Ruto and dismissed a consolidated petition in multiple suits filed by among others, Ruto’s main challenger Raila Odinga.
The petitioners had argued that the election was marred with massive irregularities and that the exercise did not meet the constitutional threshold of a free, fair, transparent and verifiable election.
The seven-member court however found no discrepancies in the vote tallies and no credible evidence that the electoral commission’s computer systems and transmission network had failed or been breached.
It held that there were valid reasons for the postponement of the gubernatorial elections in certain areas (some of which were perceived Odinga strongholds) and that there were no grounds to conclude that the postponement had affected voter turnout for the presidential election.
It found that Ruto garnered 50 per cent plus one vote as declared by the electoral commission.
The judges added that there was no credible evidence presented by the petitioners that Forms 34A containing results from polling stations were intercepted, before being uploaded to the public portal as alleged by Odinga.
They said the electoral body explained how the images were captured and how the system was safe from infiltrated by unauthorized persons.
The judges also said four disgruntled IEBC commissioners did not produce evidence to suggest that the results in their possession differed from those announced by the Chairperson of the IEBC, Wafula Chebukati.
The Chief Justice Martha Koome-led bench concluded that the malpractices and irregularities highlighted by the petitioners were “not of such magnitude to warrant nullification of the presidential election”.
About The Author
