Kalla Jackson Musyoka v Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission (I.E.B.C) & another [2017] KEHC 2001 (KLR)
- Court
- High Court of Kenya
- Case number
- 2001
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 2001 (KLR)
- Decided
- 14 November 2017
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeElection PetitionPostureApplication for additional evidence and access to KIEMs Kits
Holding
The court declines the request to introduce additional affidavits and documents, finding that the Petitioner is engaging in a fishing expedition and amending the Petition outside the stipulated period.
Facts
The Petitioner seeks to introduce additional affidavits and documents related to the election process, including gazette notices and a code of conduct, and access to KIEMs Kits and records.
Issues
- Whether the Petitioner's request to file additional affidavits of two witnesses is merited.
- Whether the Petitioner's request for access and supply to the KIEMs Kits and records is merited.
- Whether the Application for scrutiny and recount is sustainable at this stage of the proceedings.
Reasoning
The court finds that the Petitioner is not entitled to introduce additional affidavits or documents as it would amount to an amendment of the Petition outside the stipulated period, and that the Petitioner is engaging in a fishing expedition.
Outcome
The court declines the Petitioner's request to introduce additional affidavits and documents.
Orders
- The court declines the Petitioner's request to introduce additional affidavits and documents.
- The court declines the Petitioner's request for access and supply to the KIEMs Kits and records.
Authorities cited
Legislation (4)
- Elections (Parliamentary and County Elections) Petition Rules 2017
- Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission Act No. 9 of 2011
- Access to Information Act No. 31 of 2016
- Constitution of Kenya 2010
Cases cited (2)
- KAKUTA HAMISI =VS= PERIS TOBIKO AND 2 OTHERS [2013] eKLR
- Raila Odinga & Another =VS= IEBC & 2others Supreme Court Petition 1 of 2017 [2017]
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Loading judgment…