The Supreme Court has delivered the much-awaited judgment on the 2022 presidential election petition, challenging the election of William Ruto.
The Supreme Court judges have unanimously upheld the election of former deputy president William Ruto as president in the 2022 general elections.
In the ruling delivered by Chief Justice Martha Koome, the Supreme Court judges said they are satisfied that the independent and electoral boundaries commission (IEBC) carried out the 2022 elections in accordance with the law.
“We’re satisfied that [electoral commission] carried out verification, tallying & declaration of results in accordance with the constitution,” the judges said in the ruling.
Raila Odinga and his running mate Martha Karua were among various people who filed a petition at the Supreme Court challenging the 2022 presidential results. Odinga claimed that the election was marred by irregularities such as manipulation of figures and that agents of his sponsoring party, were denied access to polling stations.
Supreme Court’s Ruling Highlights
Did the technology deployed by the IEBC meet the standards of integrity, verifiability, security and transparency to guarantee accurate and verifiable results?
SC: We are not persuaded that the technology deployed failed to meet the standards of Article 86A on integrity.
Was there interference with the uploading and transmission of Forms 34A from the polling stations to the IEBC Public Portal?
SC: Court finds no credible evidence to prove that anyone accessed, intercepted or changed the voter results forms loaded on a public portal by the IEBC.
Was there a difference between Forms 34A uploaded on the IEBC Public Portal and Forms 34A received at the National Tallying Centre and Forms 34A issued to the Agents at the Polling Stations?
SC: There was no significant differences captured between the forms 34A uploaded on the public portal and the physical forms 34A delivered to the national tallying centre that would have affected the overall outcome of the presidential election.
Did the postponement of Gubernatorial Elections in Kakamega and Mombasa Counties, Parliamentary elections in Kitui Rural, Kacheliba Rongai and Pokot South Constituencies and electoral wards in Nyaki West in North Imenti Constituency and Kwa Njenga in Embakasi South Constituency, result in voter suppression to the detriment of the Petitioners in Petition No. E005 of 2022?
SC: There was no deliberate move to suppress voter turnout after it postponed some elections in parts of the country. The IEBC should have been more diligent, but there is no empirical evidence to support petitioners’ claims.
Were there unexplainable discrepancies between the votes cast for presidential candidates and other elective positions?
SC: There was no evidence of unexplained discrepancies between votes cast in various elective positions across the country and those cast in favour of the president.
Did the IEBC carry out the verification, tallying, and declaration of results in accordance with Article 138 (3) (c) and 138 (10) of the Constitution Order?
SC: The power to verify and tally presidential election results vests not in the chairperson but in the commission. In line with earlier court decisions – the chairperson cannot arrogate to himself the power to verify and tally the results to the exclusion of others.
However: The Supreme Court noted that “aside from their 11th-hour walkout, the four commissioners have not placed before this court any document to show that the election result was altered.”
And that: The dissenting commissioners did not explain participating in an opaque election. Court says it cannot nullify an election based on a “last minute boardroom rapture” of IEBC.
Did the declared President-elect [Ruto] attain 50%+1 vote of all the votes cast in accordance with Article 138 (4) of the Constitution?
SC: The judges were not persuaded by the amicus curie Law Society of Kenya to review their position on the exclusion of rejected ballots in computing the total votes cast. Court finds that the declared president-elect William Ruto attained 50%+1 of the votes and was validly declared. Rules rejected votes cannot be included in the tally of votes cast.
Were there irregularities and illegalities of such magnitude as to affect the final result of the Presidential Election?
SC: The pointed irregularities were not of such magnitude to affect the outcome of the Presidential election.
Court dismisses the presidential election petitions.
Judges declare the election of William Ruto as valid.
They rule each party bears its own legal costs.
Justice Martha Koome said the full ruling will be made available in 21 days.
PWDs Cite Discrimination in Voting