Supreme Court rules on Muhoroni MP seat nomination dispute

Supreme Court hears Muhoroni MP seat nomination dispute

What you need to know:

  • The case was heard by Chief Justice David Maraga, Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, Justices Mohammed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala and Isaac Lenaola, in a special sitting on Sunday.
  • Prof Olweny argued that Mr K’Oyoo, who was declared the winner during the ODM primaries and issued with a nomination certificate, was wrongly nominated by the party.
  • Prof Olweny later moved to the High Court where ODM was ordered to receive results from the five contested wards, tabulate the results and to declare the winner, within 72 hours.

he Supreme Court has dismissed an application challenging the nomination of Mr James Onyango K'Oyoo as the ODM candidate for Muhoroni constituency.

The appeal was filed by Prof Ayiecho Olweny.

The case was heard by Chief Justice David Maraga, Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, Justices Mohammed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala and Isaac Lenaola, in a special sitting on Sunday.

APPEAL

Following an amendment to the Political Parties Act, parties can file an appeal against a decision of the Political Parties Dispute Tribunal in the High Court on points of law and facts and on points of law to both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

Prof Olweny argued that Mr K’Oyoo, who was declared the winner during the ODM primaries and issued with a nomination certificate, was wrongly nominated by the party.

Prof Olweny challenged the nomination of Mr K’Oyoo before the ODM’s internal dispute mechanism, arguing that the results from five wards, were not included in the final results.

HIGH COURT

The case later moved to the Political Parties Dispute Tribunal, which ruled that it would not interfere with the decision of the party’s tribunal.

Prof Olweny later moved to the High Court where ODM was ordered to receive results from the five contested wards, tabulate the results and to declare the winner, within 72 hours.

But Mr K’Oyoo moved to the Court of Appeal, where three judges reversed the High Court decision.

APPROVAL

At the Supreme Court, Mr K’Oyoo argued that the court does not have the jurisdiction to hear the case, because his competitor had not sought permission from the court first to have the appeal heard.

Through lawyer Roger Sagana, Mr K’Oyoo argued permission should be sought from the court for the appeal to be admitted.