Maxwel Ochieng’ & another v Orange Democratic Movement [2017] eKLR
Tribunal. The alleged irregularities included the refusal by the 2nd Respondent to
allow for the transportation of ballot boxes and papers, the Returning Officer and
2nd Respondent locked themselves in a room and were later joined by the 2 nd
Respondent’s friend to the exclusion of the Claimant, the Returning Officer upon
coming out of the room announced the results and declared the 2nd Respondent
the winner by garnering 619 votes contrary to the 568 votes the 2nd Respondent
got.
3. Consequently, the 1st Respondent’s County Appeals Tribunal made its findings
and concluded that the 2nd Respondent refused to allow the transportation of
ballot boxes and papers to the tallying centre at Chandaria Primary School. For
these reasons, the 1st Respondent’s Appeals Tribunal vide its judgment dated 6th
May 2017 allowed the Claimant’s appeal, revoked the 2nd Respondent’s
nomination certificate, upheld the Claimant’s nomination and issued him with
an interim certificate.
4. Despite its said judgment, the 1 st Respondent went ahead and issued the 2nd
Respondent with the final nomination certificate prompting the filing of the
complaint herein for the following prayers:
a) An order restraining the 1 st Respondent or its servants from submitting the
name of the 2nd Respondent to the IEBC as the valid 1 st Respondent’s nominee
for the position of the Member of County Assembly, Korogocho Ward,
Ruaraka Constituency, Nairobi County.
b) An order declaring the Claimant as the valid 1st Respondent’s nominee for the
position of the Member of County Assembly, Korogocho Ward, Ruaraka
Constituency, Nairobi County.
c) A declaration that the award of the nomination certificate to the 2 nd
Respondent or any other person, other than the Claimant, as the candidate for
Page 2 of 6