BREAKING: JUDGMENT DELIVERED IN Mbeere North ELECTION PETITION CASE!

Indiziert: 2026-05-21

[00:00:00]weekly. Actually, I've just reiterated, I've plucked from the body of each conclusion and I brought it back to the conclusions and this position.

[00:00:11]Um so that on issue one, I find that no qualitative disqualifying attribute in appointment and dismissal of IEBC election officials was demonstrated.

[00:00:24]On issue two, again I have plucked the conclusion I reached under that issue and brought it forward.

[00:00:30]It was demonstrated by evidence that there was a physical register, voter voter's register available at every polling station, that it had a QR code, um that the KIEMS kit had a soft copy replica of that register.

[00:00:46]No evidence was availed that any voter was disenfranchised since the physical registers were present and were also replicated in the KIEMS kits.

[00:00:59]Then I point out the jurisprudence on the use of the physical register is essentially what is carried in the UDA case, that such register is only to be used on in instances where biometric or alpha numeric identification fails.

[00:01:15]The UDA the UDA case, I may say, does not entirely deal with section 72, regulation 72. It doesn't entirely uh with regard to assisted voters.

[00:01:32]There was no evidence of such failure of identification Sorry, the prevailing jurisprudence on the use of registers is the UDA case.

[00:01:40]Is that such register is only to be used in instances where biometric or alpha numeric identification fails.

[00:01:46]There was no evidence of such failure of identification. Had there been a failure of biometric and alpha numerical identification followed by failure by IEBC to deploy the physical register, a case of voter disenfranchisement would have been readily made out.

[00:02:07]On issue three, whether there was unlawful third-party interference, on this I came to the conclusion that it was not proved that in admitted interference with the register was either widespread, systemic, or intended.

[00:02:18]In substance, therefore, there was no proof that the of the fact that the sole ins- that the sole instance of interference that we saw in the case of Collins affected the will of the people. It was also held that in the case of one individual where the register was shown to be to have been unlawfully altered, the officer involved may have committed a criminal offense.

[00:02:45]On issue four um the same summary that I I I took I take the same summary or conclusion.

[00:02:54]Um and this is where I said Kaungu theoretically suffered a turnout to decrease of about eight 8% of 51 voters as against the constituency average.

[00:03:07]But I found overall the failure did not affect the outcome in terms of section 81 of the Elections Act.

[00:03:19]Section 82, sorry, of the Elections Act.

[00:03:23]On issue five, whether there was bribery treating, maybe I just read all of them.

[00:03:27]If you don't mind, let me just read all of them so that I don't uh give an impression.

[00:03:33]On issue five, whether there was bribery treating and undue influence in violation of the Election Offences Act and the Constitution, there was uncontroverted evidence of bribery involving two witnesses. As an election court, this court can make a determination only on whether the the the election malpractice whether an election of an electoral malpractice of a criminal nature may have occurred in terms of section 87 of the election act but not on whether the offense of bribery was committed. I do find that an electoral malpractice of bribery may have occurred.

[00:04:06]As to whether the electoral malpractice of bribery and voter influence so found results in the nullification of the election, the evidence does not does not show that the scope and prevalence of the malpractice substantially affected the result of the election in terms of section 83 of the elections act.

[00:04:23]On issue six, whether there was broken chain of custody and lawful handling of election materials and violation of procedure on close of polling, the totality of the evidence availed disclosed that one out of 134 polling stations there was broken chain of custody, possible unlawful handling of voting material, but no violation of poll closing procedure at Gitiburi one and two except with regard to the time.

[00:04:58]For Kaungu, there was evidence of violence but no evidence of broken chain of custody.

[00:05:03]Unlawful handling of violation of violation of poll station poll station closing procedure. Consequently, there's no basis for the finding that the irregularities or non-compliance was substantial and affected the election outcome in terms of the section 83 one of the elections act. Had it been demonstrated that the sort of violence shown at Kaungu was pervasive or widespread, a positive case would have been made out to conclude that the violence affected the overall quality of the election and had a significant impact on the result.

[00:05:33]Issue seven.

[00:05:38]On whether there was use of state resources, state security offices to influence the voters.

[00:05:45]It was incumbent on the petitioner in order to prove issue seven to provide at least the minimum information or proof the names which are some of which are provided, their formal designations, offices held and particulars and nature of the alleged abuses of such offices provisions of the law breached and the overall effect of such abuses upon the electorate and the election outcome. The petitioner failed to provide these through the evidence adduced.

[00:06:18]Accordingly, the court is unable to find in his favor on this issue.

[00:06:22]On issue number eight um the same, the court was unable to find in favor of the of the uh petitioner, the same on even the assisted voters because with the assisted voters, what I have done is that I have said I take seriously the caution by the superior courts concerning unpleaded evidence gathered through scrutiny.

[00:06:49]The outright determination, the overall determination, for all the foregoing reasons, the court finds that the petition was not proved to the required standard and it is hereby dismissed with costs.

[00:07:02]The costs are as follows.

[00:07:06]The costs are as follows.

[00:07:08]The parties made submissions on costs generally to the effect that costs follow the event.

[00:07:13]The first to third respondents counsel went into some fair detail indicating the depth of the case, the number of attendances, preparatory time, complexity, and so on.

[00:07:23]The first to the third respondents and the fourth respondents both indicated that costs should be at Kenya shillings 5 million.

[00:07:32]The petitioner only uh submitted in during highlighting.

[00:07:40]So, having considered the nature of the case and the input of the parties and noting the fourth respondent did not testify to have availed witnesses, I hereby cap party and party costs at Kenya shillings 4 million.

[00:07:52]The first to third respondents shall be entitled to 70% thereof and the fourth respondent to 30% thereof.

[00:08:01]I have prepared a report of the court on electoral practices under section 87 of the Elections Act, which is as follows. The court finds that the following malpractices of a criminal nature may have been committed.

[00:08:24]And directs that the same be transmitted to the DPP.

[00:08:28]A, admitted alteration of register without authority, contrary to section 61 of the Election Offences Act.

[00:08:38]B, double assistance of voters.

[00:08:41]That is allowing six persons to assist more than one voter each contrary to regulation 72 5C of the regulations.

[00:08:49]C, failure to record in the polling station register against the name of of the voter the fact that the voter was assisted contrary to regulation 72 6.

[00:09:04]I will make recommendations separately.

[00:09:07]There I'll not because there's no there's no point of putting the recommendations in the judgment, but I'll make recommendations separately particularly for IBC's notice uh subsequent to this judgment cuz I think it is important.

[00:09:22]Um Certificate of the of court as to validity of the election under section 86 of the Elections Act. Having concluded the hearing of the election petition, I certify that the petition was dismissed and the fourth respondent remains the duly elected member of parliament for Baringo North constituency.

[00:09:44]This information is to be submitted to and transmitted to the speaker of the National Assembly.

[00:09:53]Orders accordingly.

[00:10:02]Yeah, my lord, we are also obliged by the decision of the court. We have sat and listened to it.

[00:10:10]We appreciate where the court is coming from.

[00:10:14]But we however would wish to make an appeal in regard to some of the issues the court has dealt with.

[00:10:22]And therefore, my lord, we are making an application