Supreme Court enjoins Aukot, Wainaina as interested parties in petition
What you need to know:
- The judges said the orders sought by rival parties would have drastic consequences to the petition and it was in the interest of justice to deny applications for expunging of the said affidavits and documents.
- In unanimous decisions delivered in the court on Sunday evening the judges, led by Chief Justice David Maraga, said they had admitted the Attorney General because he had raised similar issues highlighted by other parties.
The Supreme Court has allowed the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) and the Attorney General Githu Muigai to be enjoined in the Presidential petition as amicus curiae (friends of the court) but limited their brief to specific issues.
On the second day of its formal sitting to hear the presidential petition filed by Mr Raila Odinga, who is challenging the re-election of President Uhuru Kenyatta, the seven judges of the court also admitted Dr Ekuru Aukot and Mr Michael Wainaina as interested parties saying the outcome of the petition will directly affect as they were candidates in the Presidential election.
In unanimous decisions delivered in the court on Sunday evening the judges, led by Chief Justice David Maraga, said they had admitted the Attorney General because he had raised similar issues highlighted by other parties.
“We allow him to come on record because he can assist the court on several issues touching on proper constitutional and legal standards applicable in the presidential election,” the judges said in the ruling delivered in court by Mr Maraga.
However the judges limited Mr Muigai’s scope, asking him to limit his submission on the effect of jurisprudence on the Court of Appeal case filed by activist Maina Kiai and which decided that the results announced at the constituency in the presidential race were final.
ELECTIONS ACT
The scope of the LSK was also limited and the lawyers’ body will be forced to restrict itself to the single issue of interpretation of sections 83 of the Elections Act which touches on nullification of an election that does not comply with the electoral laws.
The court asked those who were brought on record to file their affidavits and written submissions and serve the parties by 9am on Monday morning.
However an application by Mr Wainaina to be enjoined as amicus was thrown out by the court on the grounds that he did not meet the legal criteria lacked the requisite qualification as dictated by the law.
The court however admitted him, alongside Dr Aukot, as an interest party because he meets the criteria and that having been a presidential candidate he had an “identifiable stake” in the outcome of the petition.
However, attempts by lawyer Charles Kanjama to be enjoined as amicus was rejected because he does not posses the alleged expertise as he claimed in his plaint.
Also to lose out was Mr Benjamin Barasa Wafula had his application to be an enjoined as interested party dismissed because it lacked merit.
