Bakari Hassan Juma v Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission (IEBC) & 2 others [2013] KEMC 97 (KLR)
- Court
- Magistrate's Courts
- Case number
- 97
- Citation
- [2013] KEMC 97 (KLR)
- Decided
- 14 May 2013
AI Summary
Beta
Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeElection PetitionPosturePetitioner seeks to withdraw the petition and substitute a new petitionerCoramNathan Shiundu, Ag. SPM
Holding
Allowing the applications to withdraw the petition and substitute a new petitioner, with costs to the respondents and a fresh security of costs to be deposited by the substituted petitioner.
Facts
The petitioner Bakari Hassan Juma denied signing the petition and claimed he was approached to be a witness. He was later substituted by Twahir Abdulkarim Mohammed.
Issues
- Substitution of the petitioner
- Withdrawal of the petition
Reasoning
Proceedings in election petitions are sui generis and not subject to the same rules as ordinary civil proceedings. The court allows the substitution due to the time frame for filing election petitions and the public interest involved.
Outcome
Allowing the applications
Orders
- Order for costs to the respondents
- Order for a fresh security of costs to be deposited by the substituted petitioner
- Order for the 1st respondent to move with speed and comply with Rule 2 of election petition rules
- Order for the substituted petitioner to file and serve any further witness affidavits on or before 17/5/2013
- Order for the parties to agree on the petitioner's application and a hearing date to be given on 20/5/2013
Remedies
- Costs to the respondents
- Fresh security of costs to be deposited by the substituted petitioner
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Elections Act 2011
- Election (Parliamentary and Country Elections) Petition Rules 2013
Cases cited (2)
- PETER NGUNJU GAKUNGA & DEDAN KIRAGU KINGORI VS FREDRICK MAINA & JOSEPH A. GATHENJI E.P NO. 47/1993
- ROBERT NELSON NGETHE VS MBOGORI NJERU & ANOTHER [2005] E KLR
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…