Court bars debate over whether ICC pair will run for presidency
The High Court has banned all public debate on whether Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto are eligible to contest the presidency.
Mr Justice Isaac Lenaola ruled that pending the hearing and determination of a petition filed by civil society groups challenging the eligibility of the two after they were indicted by the ICC, the matter was now in court and therefore not for public debate.
“The question of whether Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto are qualified to run for the presidency in the coming elections is now before court and all persons and authorities enjoined are not to discuss the matter in public failure to which the court may take such action as it deems appropriate,” ruled Justice Lenaola.
Justice Lenaola added that Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto, who were not represented in court, were at liberty to revisit the orders if they feel gagged and aggrieved by the directions when the matter is mentioned on February 17.
Justice Lenalola pointed that the matter was sub-judice, which means that public comment on the merit or demerit on the issue before the court could influence the proceedings.
The rule restricts media from carrying news reports or commentaries on whether or not Uhuru and Ruto can contest the presidency.
Justice Lenaola underlined the restriction at the request of one of the lawyers appearing for the plaintiffs, who was supported by other parties in the case.
Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto were at a public meeting on Thursday where speakers hit out at Justice Minister Mutula Kilonzo who has been insisting they cannot be allowed to stand for president. (READ: ICC: Mutula dismisses Uhuru, Ruto presidential bid)
The petition was filed by a group of civil society activists and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) seeking a declaration that statements by the two that they will vie for the presidency despite the ICC ruling is a threat to the Constitution. (READ: IDPs join case against chaos suspects)
Through lawyer Anthony Oluoch, the groups want a court interpretation of Article 6 of the Constitution on leadership and integrity, and whether the two should be eligible to vie for leadership positions.
They want an order to permanently restrain the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission from accepting the nomination of any candidate who has been committed to trial for serious criminal charges under the Kenyan and International law.
The groups also want a declaration that the presumption of innocence in favor Mr Kenyatta, the Gatundu North MP, and Mr Ruto, Eldoret North MP, should not override the need to uphold the principles of the Constitution.
According to Mr Oluoch, the implication of the charges by the ICC means that their eligibility to contest elective post should be determined before the elections.
He submitted that any failure by the Electoral Commission to enforce the provisions on national values, rule of law, good governance and integrity by accepting the candidature of the two ICC accused will be a breach of the Constitution.
Several parties and individual applied and were allowed to be enjoined in the suit, with Justice Lenaola directing that they file their responses within 14 days. The Attorney-General will appear as respondents together with the Commission on the Implementation of the Constitution and the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, which said it will contest the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter.
Those admitted as interested parties were the International Centre for Policy and Constitutionalism, Kanu, Eric Kioko and Ndungu Njoroge while Dr Stephen Njiru will appear as amicus curiae.
