BLOW TO WANJIGI AS SUPREME COURT DECLINES TO STOP PRINTING OF BALLOT PAPERS.

0
2184
Businessman Jimmy Wanjigi./PHOTO BY S.A.N.

BY SAM ALFAN.

The Supreme Court has dismissed an application by businessman Jimmy Wanjigi to stop the printing of ballot papers pending the determination of his petition.

Wanjigi moved to the top court after his bid to be included in the presidential ballot papers was dismissed.

The businessman cum politician argued that it would be pointless proceed with the appeal yet the ballot papers, which do not bear his name are being printed.

A bench led by Chief Justice Martha Koome, Deputy Chief Philomena Mwilu, Mohammed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala and William Ouko dismissed the application saying Wanjigi failed to convince them why the printing process should be halted.

“The Notice of Motion Application dated July 13, 2022 and filed on July 14 2022 be and is hereby disallowed,” ruled Supreme Court.

Supreme Court further ruled that the businessman failed to show that the petition had met the threshold for invoking the court’s jurisdiction.

“With the above finding, we are unable to consider or grant the conservatory relief sought pending the determination of the status of the petition of appeal whose jurisdiction is also under challenge by way of preliminary objection. The urgency of the matter not being contested, we can only fast-track the determination thereof,” added judges.

It was Wanjigi’s arguement that he satisfied the twin principles of arguability and nugatory aspect to entitle him get the orders sought.

He further submited that the petition of appeal has been filed contemporaneously with the present application and is due for hearing necessitating the prayer to preserve the substratum of the appeal.

IEBC and Chairman Wafula Chebukati opposed to the application on grounds that Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to determine the appeal.

He further stated that the petition does not raise a matter of great public importance to be considered by the top court.

The electoral body submitted that the August elections date is set by the Constitution and the date cannot be moved or changed.

“The election has a strict constitutional timeline and granting the orders sought has the possibility of throwing the constitutional order in limbo and that ballot papers have already been printed and for good use of public resources as prescribed under Article 201 of the Constitution, the Court should decline the invitation to grant orders sought,” Chebukati said.

LEAVE A REPLY