NAIROBI, Kenya, Sept, 3 – As the country waits with bated breath for Judges of the Supreme Court of Kenya to make their judgement on the outcome of the presidential election results, where the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) chairperson Wafula Chebukati declared United Democratic Alliance presidential candidate William Ruto, president-elect – The final day of hearing saw the petitioners call out the conduct of the poll body’s chair during the elections.
Chebukati was accused of harbouring authoritarianism tendencies while isolating his fellow colleagues, with lawyers saying they were equals in the eye of the law.
“It was the intention of the makers of the constitution that the commission should have an executive chairperson. We have to proceed with what is in the constitution. The chairperson rushed to judgment without the 27 constituency results because of the doctrine of necessity, said counsel Kindiki in justification of this,” said senior counsel Pheroze Nowrojee.
Lawyers representing IEBC had earlier denounced the claims saying that Cbehukati was within his rights to declare Ruto as president-elect since he was the national presidential returning officer.
On Thursday, Supreme Court Justice Njoki Ndung’u raised several questions to the respondent’s lawyers, particularly on claims of an all-powerful Chairperson who allegedly conducted his business at the commission without any meaningful oversight.
“Drafters of the constitution introduced independent commissions and independent offices to deal with issues of authoritarianism, accountability, transparency and to do away with the issue of one person having power,” said Justice Ndung’u who further noted,” But from the narrative we are hearing from the court there appears to be an all powerful chair…so what is the check for this all-powerful chair if the commissioners have nothing to do with his role?”
Following further claims that the others commissioners were assigned minimal chores, Ndung’u sought to understand what the roles of individual commissioners were as stipulated in the constitution.
“What is the role of the other commissioners? I think this is bothering me especially because it seems to me that your clients and the IEBC suggests the chairperson works with the CEO. i feel a bit concerned the CEO is not vetted by parliament, he is appointed but he seems to wield immense powers over and above the other commissioners,” she said.
Former Attorney General Githu Muigai representing IEBC said that Chebukati had been vilified despite executing his mandate to his level best during the elections.
“The pattern of attack is the same since the Kivuitu-led commission. None of them has been allowed to leave office without vilification and a vindictive process being engineered towards them.There is nothing wrong with Chebukati. There is something very wrong in the way the persons who participate in the electoral process accept losing or winning after an election,” said Githu.
Petitioners’ lawyers further debunked Chebukati’s claims to being the presidential returning officer saying there was no legislation to support his claims.
The IEBC chairperson is accused of announcing the presidential election results despite not reading out results from 27 constituencies on August 15, 2022.
Four breakaway commissioners led by IEBC vice chairperson Juliana Cherera said they would not take responsibility for the outcome of the results citing the opaque nature of the process by the Chairperson.
Want to send us a story? Contact Shahidi News Tel: +254115512797 (Mobile & WhatsApp)
