BY SAM ALFAN.
Irene Masit, the last man standing in a battle to retain her position has challenged the tribunal appointed by President William Ruto to probe her conduct over the August 9 general election.
Masit is the only Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission official left standing after three other commissioners including vice chairperson Juliana Cherera threw in the towel rather than face the tribunal.
President Ruto appointed the tribunal after several petitions were presented to Parliament seeking the removal of the commissioners famously referred to as Cherera four.
The four had distanced themselves from the 2022 presidential election results as announced by electoral body chairman Wafula Chebukati and even supported a petition supporting the nullification of the results.
But Masit has challenged the tribunal chaired by Court of Appeal judge Aggrey Muchelule saying it lacks the powers to probe their conduct.
“If the Tribunal claims it has jurisdiction, it will be a constitutional hearsay and a permanent blot that will in fullness of time be corrected,” says Commissioner Masit.
Through lawyer Donald Kipkorir, Masit says the Tribunal must rise up to its constitutional occasion and hold that the petition before it has no constitutional, statutory or factual foundation.
She adds that the Tribunal must have courage to down decline hearing the petition and allow the High Court hear a case she has filed before the High Court.
She says the documents filed before Muchelule led Tribunal are complete departure from petitions filed before the Parliament’s departmental committee on justice and legal affairs.
Masit says the petition has changed in character, details and evidence of the petitions, in violation of Article 50(2) (b) of the constitution and section 4 of Fair Administration Action Act.
“The original petitions were filed without supporting evidence and thus in contravention of section 107 ,108,109 and 110 of evidence Act , Cap 80 , Article 50 (50) (2) of the constitution and section 4 of Fair Administration Action Act,” Masit told the Tribunal.
Lawyer Kipkorir told the Tribunal that in building up and beefing the petition from its original character , both departmental committee and the Tribunal ceased being impartial as they have actively taken over petition from the petitioners in contravention of the constitution.
He further told the Tribunal that the committee was chaired by MP Gitonga Murungara who was part of the UDA party legal team and he never disclosed that and the committee’s findings were tainted with bias , irrationality and impartiality.
“Tribunal has introduced evidence that was tendered in the supreme court presidential petition and fully determined . In attempting to re-open matters determined by the supreme court. The Tribunal is violating doctrine of Res judicata and Article 140 of the constitution. Supreme Court’s decision is final , conclusive and binding,” commissioner Masit lawyer Kipkorir told the Tribunal.
Commissioner Masit accused the Muchelule Tribunal of introducing evidence that weren’t referred to or evidenced at all in the original petitions. She said that the Tribunal was relying on evidence obtained illegally.
“In a cynical move, the Tribunal obtained what is purported to be her entry into a public hotel as though entering to such facility is a criminal or nefarious,” says Commissioner Masit.
