Kuria & 5 others v Hassan & 5 others [2013] KESC 3 (KLR)

Kuria & 5 others v Hassan & 5 others (Petition 3, 4 & 5 of 2013 (Consolidated)) [2013] KESC 3 (KLR) (Election Petitions) (20 March 2013) (Directions)

MOSES KIARIE KURIA & 2 OTHERS V ISSACK HASSAN & ANOTHER[2013]eKLR

Neutral citation: [2013] KESC 3 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Supreme Court of Kenya

Election Petitions

Petition 3, 4 & 5 of 2013 (Consolidated)

WM Mutunga, CJ & P, PK Tunoi, MK Ibrahim, JB Ojwang, SC Wanjala & NS Ndungu, SCJJ

March 20, 2013

Between

Moses Kiarie Kuria

1st Petitioner

Denis Njue Itumbi

2nd Petitioner

Flowrence Jematiah Sergon

3rd Petitioner

and

Issack Hassan

1st Respondent

Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission

2nd Respondent

As consolidated with

Petition 4 of 2013

Between

Gladwell Wathoni Otieno

1st Petitioner

Zahid Rajan

2nd Petitioner

and

Ahmed Issack Hassan

1st Respondent

Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission

2nd Respondent

Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta

3rd Respondent

William Samoei Ruto

4th Respondent

As consolidated with

Petition 5 of 2013

Between

Raila Odinga

Petitioner

and

Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission

1st Respondent

Ahmed Issack Hassan

2nd Respondent

Uhuru Kenyatta

3rd Respondent

William Samoei Ruto

4th Respondent

Supreme Court issues directions for the presidential election petitions challenging the outcome of the March 4, 2013 presidential elections

The Supreme Court issued directions to be complied with in the presidential election petitions challenging the outcome of the March 4, 2013 presidential elections.

Reported by Kakai Toili

Electoral Law- election petitions - presidential election petitions - what was the role of advocates in relation to the conduct of their clients in presidential election petitions - what was the role of the media in relation to their conduct in presidential election petitions.

Brief facts Three petitions challenging the validity of the March 4, 2013 presidential elections were filed in the Supreme Court. The petitions had elicited immense public interest and generated endless media coverage and commentary. The court issued directions to be followed before the petitions were determined.

Issues

What was the role of advocates in relation to the conduct of their clients in presidential election petitions.

What was the role of the media in relation to their conduct in presidential election petitions.

Held

The court was ready and prepared to hear and determine the petitions on the basis of the Constitution, the applicable law, and the evidence. In the interests of justice and for the efficient, effective, transparent and impartial determination of the petitions, the court issued the following directions:

The court was fully seized of the petitions challenging the presidential elections. Towards that end, the petitioners and respondents, and their agents, supporters or advisors were directed to desist from prosecuting the merits of their cases in any forum other than the court.

It was the responsibility of the advocates on record to advise their clients in the cases about the consequences of conduct or statements that could undermine the authority of the court.

While the media had to, in keeping with its constitutional mandate, continue to keep the public informed about the progress of the petitions, media houses and individual journalists and commentators were to perform their functions in a fair, impartial and responsible manner. The media was required to strictly adhere to the code of conduct for the practice of journalism in Kenya at all times.

A comprehensive checklist of documents and relevant matters would be prepared and issued by the court to the advocates on record, in time for the pre-trial conference, scheduled to take place on the March 25, 2013. Upon receipt of the checklist, parties would be required to prepare and file their responses in the Supreme Court Registry on or before the March 23, 2013.

Directions issued.

Citations CasesNone referred toStatutesKenyaConstitution of Kenya, 2010 In general - (Cited)AdvocatesNone mentioned

Directions

1. Three petitions challenging the validity of the just concluded presidential elections have been filed in the Supreme Court. The petitions have, not surprisingly, elicited immense public interest and generated endless media coverage and commentary. The court is ready and prepared to hear and determine the petitions on the basis of theConstitution, the applicable law, and the evidence. In the interests of justice, and for the efficient, effective, transparent and impartial determination of the petitions, the court hereby issues the following directions. 1. The court is now fully seized of the petitions challenging the presidential elections. Towards this end, the petitioners and respondents, and their agents, supporters or advisors are directed to desist from prosecuting the merits of their cases in any forum other than this court.

2. It is the responsibility of the advocates on record to advise their clients in these cases, about the consequences of conduct or statements that can undermine the authority of this court.

3. While the media must, in keeping with its constitutional mandate, continue to keep the public informed about the progress of these petitions, media houses and individual journalists and commentators are to perform their functions in a fair, impartial and responsible manner. The media is required to strictly adhere to the code of conduct for the practice of journalism in Kenya at all times.

4. A comprehensive checklist of documents and relevant matter will be prepared and issued by the court to the advocates on record, in time for the pre-trial conference, scheduled to take place on the March 25, 2013. Upon receipt of the said checklist, parties shall be required to prepare and file their responses in the Supreme Court registry on or before the March 23, 2013.

DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013. ..............................W MUTUNGACHIEF JUSTICE & PRESIDENT OFTHE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................PK TUNOIJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................MK IBRAHIMJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................JB OJWANGJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................SC WANJALAJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA..............................NS NDUNGUJUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYAI certify that this is a true Copy of the originalREGISTRARSUPREME COURT OF KENYA