Supreme Court shouldn’t blow hot and cold in its poll dispute decisions – Business Daily
Chief Justice Martha Koome during the third day of hearing of presidential petition at Supreme Court, Milimani on September 2, 2022. PHOTO | JEFF ANGOTE | NMG
Disputing an election and petitioning the same in a court of law isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It is a way to determine the legitimacy of the win and accord the winner all the right without any iota of doubt while at the same time affording the losing party all the opportunity to be shown how their loss was outright and nothing out of the blues.
It also allows the courts to help enrich our laws, particularly given that our legislature is very weak and only serves to rubber stamp executive decisions without any interrogation. We all know how the meek houses of Parliament have been used to create some terrible law but a court came through for Kenyans and corrected the shenanigans.
The attempt to review the Constitution through BBI was one such case. We shouldn’t, therefore, condemn anyone who exercises their right to an arbitration should they feel aggrieved by any decision of whatever nature and even less so when the dispute in question is as monumental and significant like the recent presidential election dispute.
The Supreme Court in setting aside the result of a presidential election in 2017 appeared to have settled the question of what really constitute a fair and credible election.
The court insisted that a final product of flawed process must not be allowed to stand, without even considering the magnitude of the alleged infringement and the capacity to materially affect the result. It is common knowledge the Supreme Court in 2017 took a radical departure from its 2013 position.
While Supreme Court enjoys the discretion to depart from its earlier decision, it must not be seen to be blowing hot and cold if consistency means anything, unless otherwise justified.
Some landmark court rulings have seriously defined our interpretation of laws.
With the latest petition, the court was invited to settle the question of the role of the chairman of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission versus the commissioners in the management of a presidential election and Kenyans are looking forward to see how this question will be settled ones and for all.
Whichever way it goes, it will add to our beautiful jurisprudential excellence which get referenced from far and wide.
