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

Asha Adbi v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 2 others [2018] KEMC 48 (KLR)

[2018] KEMC 48 (KLR) Magistrate's Courts
Read PDF
Court
Magistrate's Courts
Case number
48
Citation
[2018] KEMC 48 (KLR)
Decided
9 February 2018
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeElection PetitionPosturePetitioner contests the nomination of members of County Assembly Nairobi CountyCoramHON E.K. USUI (MS), SENIOR PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE
Holding

The Court is satisfied that the nomination of the 2nd respondent member of county assembly Nairobi pursuant to Article 177 (1) (b) were validly elected. None of the prayers sought by the petitioner has merit. The petition is dismissed with costs to 1st and 2nd respondent.

Facts

The petitioner contests the nomination of members of County Assembly Nairobi County under Article 177 (1) b and c of the Constitution. Her case against the 1st respondent is that it failed to scrutinize the party list forwarded to it by the 2nd respondent in order to ensure that the list complied with the constitution, Election Laws and Regulations and that it failed to ensure that the special interest groups were represented. The petitioner’s case against the 2nd respondent is that it failed to comply with the provision of Section 25(1) of the Election Act by nominating unregistered voters. That it failed to comply with provision of Article 90 (2) (c) of the constitution by nominating candidates outside the county for which the post were created.

Issues

  1. Failure to scrutinize party list
  2. Nominating unregistered voters
  3. Nominating candidates outside the county
  4. Failure to provide a list of members to the 1st respondent
  5. Failure to adhere to Party Election and Nomination Rules
  6. Failure to comply with orders issued by the 1st respondent disputes resolution committee

Reasoning

The Court finds that the petitioner's case is based more on speculation and she was unable to prove her allegations with tangible evidence. The Court is satisfied that the 1st respondent properly and adequately discharged its mandate in accordance with the provision of the law and that the 2nd respondent adhered to its guidelines and principles for party nomination of party list and as set out under the law and that it complied with its guidelines.

Outcome

Petition dismissed with costs

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Elections Act
  • Party Election and Nomination Rules
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