MICHAEL FRANCIS CHEMONGES KITIYO V INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION (IEBC) & ANOTHER [2013] KEHC 5229 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

High Court at Nairobi (Nairobi Law Courts)

Judicial Review 41 of 2013 [if !mso]> <style> v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif][if gte mso 9]><xml>

Normal 0

false false false

EN-ZA X-NONE X-NONE

</xml><![endif][if gte mso 9]><![endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; text-align:justify; text-indent:-17. 85pt; line-height:200%; font-size:11. 0pt;"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]

MICHAEL FRANCIS CHEMONGES KITIYO .......................................................................................APPLICANT

AND

THE INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND BOUNDARIES COMMISSION (IEBC) ................1ST RESPONDENT

IEBC NOMINATION DISPUTE RESOLUTION COMMITTEE...............................................2ND  RESPONDENT

AND

FORD KENYA ...................................................................................................................1ST INTERESTED PARTY

JENNIFER MASIS ............................................................................................................2ND INTERESTED PARTY

JUDGMENT

1. The application before the Court is a Chamber Summons dated 31st January 2013 which seeks leave to apply for an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the 2nd respondent’s decision of 28th January 2013 seeking to dismiss his complaint before the complainant’s tribunal.

2. The gravamen of the applicant’s dispute was that he was declared the winner for the Endebes Constituency Ford Kenya primary held on 17th January 2013 but the party declined to issue him with a nomination certificate but gave the 2nd interested party, Jennifer Masis a direct nomination. He also complains that the party declined to hear his complaint.

3. The applicant filed a complaint before the 2nd respondent’s complainant’s tribunal and on 28th January 2013, the tribunal dismissed the complaint for insufficient evidence and upheld the party position regarding the fact that no election was held.

4. When the matter came up for hearing on 1st February 2013, counsel for the applicant, who had appeared in court earlier, did not turn up nor did the applicant. We however scrutinised the application and the decision complained of and were satisfied that there were no grounds to impugn the decision of the board and the Board was entitled to come to the decision it did on 28th January 2013. Consequently we dismissed the application.

DatedandDelivered at Nairobithis 5th February 2013

D.S. MAJANJA

JUDGE

W. KORIR

JUDGE

G. V. ODUNGA

JUDGE