SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Asin & 2 others v Chebukati & 9 others (Petition 429 of 2017) [2017] KEHC 9388 (KLR) (Constitutional and Human Rights) (9 October 2017) (Judgment)

[2017] KEHC 9388 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
9388
Citation
[2017] KEHC 9388 (KLR)
Decided
9 October 2017
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypePetitionPostureAppeal from the Supreme CourtCoramFormer, IL, Ngcobo, Odunga, Sachs
Holding

The court held that the presidential election was not conducted in accordance with the constitution and applicable law, rendering the results invalid.

Facts

The petitioners challenged the presidential results of the 2017 elections, alleging that the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) failed to comply with the Constitution, the Elections Act, and the Regulations.

Issues

  1. whether the court should decline jurisdiction
  2. whether the Supreme Court indicted the first to eighth respondents
  3. whether the petitioners are entitled to the reliefs sought
  4. what is the appropriate order regarding costs

Reasoning

The court discussed the jurisdiction of courts in Kenya, stating that jurisdiction is regulated by the Constitution or legislation. It cited Supreme Court decisions to support its reasoning.

Outcome

The court found the petitioners' allegations to be true and declared the presidential election invalid.

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Constitution of Kenya 2010
  • Elections Act
  • Leadership and Integrity Act
Cases cited (4)
  • Cohens vs. Virginia
  • AB vs Minister of Social Development
  • Sali vs National Commissioner of the South African Police Service
  • Biowatch Trust v Registrar, Genetic Resources
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.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case