Previous 13 / 28 Next

[2] Based on the aforesaid results, the Chairperson of the IEBC declared William Samoei Ruto, (the 1st respondent), the Presidential Candidate for the United Democratic Alliance Party, as the Presidentelect. This declaration precipitated a total of nine (9) Presidential Election Petitions led before this court to wit; (i) Presidential Election Petition No E001 of 2022 - John Njoroge Kamau v Wafula Chebukati and 3 others (respondents) and Raila Amolo Odingaa and 7 Others (interested parties). (ii) Presidential Election Petition No E002 of 2022 - Youth Advocacy Africa & another v IEBC & 12 others. (iii) Presidential Election Petition No E003 of 2022 - Khelef Khalifa & 3 others v IEBC & 3 others. (iv) Presidential Election Petition No E004 of 2022 - David Kariuki Ngari v IEBC & 9 others. (v) Presidential Election Petition No E005 of 2022 - Raila Amollo Odinga & Another v IEBC & 8 others. (vi) Presidential Election Petition No E006 of 2022 - Moses Kuria & others v Hon Raila Amolo Odinga and 4 other interested parties. (vii) Presidential Election Petition No E007 of 2022 - Okiya Omtatah Okoiti & Others v IEBC & others. (viii) Presidential Election Petition No E008 of 2022 - Juliah Nyokabi Chege & 2 Others v IEBC & 3 others. (ix) Presidential Election Petition No E009 of 2022 - Reuben Kigame Lichete v The Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission (IEBC), and others. [3] Further, a total of twenty-four (24) interlocutory applications and one (1) preliminary objection were led and determined by this court. Two of the Presidential Election Petitions were struck out, that is, Presidential Election Petition Nos E006 and E009 of 2022 for failure to meet the constitutional threshold as set out under article 140(1) of the Constitution. [4] On August 29, 2022 this court also admitted three amici curiae briefs by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK), the Kenyan Section of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ Kenya Chapter) and John Walubengo & 2 others. A. Consolidation of Petitions [5] Upon perusing and considering the issues raised in the remaining Presidential Election Petition Nos E001, E002, E003, E004, E005, E007, and E008, the responses and the submissions led thereto; this court found that all the seven petitions substantially raised similar issues and sought similar reliefs. Consequently, on August 30, 2022, this court ordered that the seven petitions be consolidated and designated Presidential Election Petition No E005 of 2022 as the lead le. B. Issues for Determination [6] From the consolidated petition, responses and submissions led thereto by all the parties, the court crystallised the following issues for determination: 1. Whether the technology deployed by the IEBC for the conduct of the 2022 general elections met the standards of integrity, veriability, security, and transparency to guarantee accurate and veriable results; kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/240578/ 13

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Odinga, et. al v. Ruto

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether petitioners’ evidence of interference and election fraud satisfied the appropriate level of evidence as required by the Court and affected the election result, warranting the cancellation and rerun of the election?

Alleged Acts: Kenya’s former prime minister, Raila Odinga, accused President-Elect William Ruto, who beat Odinga in the country’s 2022 national election, of vote tampering, ballot stuffing, and fraudulently interfering with the election.

Procedural history: Seven days after the results of the election were announced, the petitioners filed this suit directly to the Supreme Court of Kenya, which has direct authority to hear cases concerning national electoral matters.

Summary: At the conclusion of the 2022 Kenyan national elections, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) of Kenya declared Respondent William Ruto the winner of the presidency by less than 2 percent of the total vote. However, several days after the election, petitioner Raila Odinga, the country’s former prime minister and Ruto’s opponent, sued the IEBC for being nontransparent and biased towards the respondent and alleged voter fraud and ballot stuffing by the respondent and his supporters. Based on these arguments, petitioner sought to have the election nullified. Odinga and sixteen other petitioners – all supporters of Odinga, including his running mate – challenged the results and argued that the technology used by the IEBC “fell short of the prescribed constitutional and statutory standards” of Kenya. They also alleged that certain ballot station workers intercepted, detained, or stored ballot forms to tamper with the election process. The IEBC denied the assertions but admitted there was “confusion with the printed ballot papers” and that they had discovered a “mix-up on the eve of the election[.]” Based on this, the petitioners argued that there may have been sufficient levels of vote tampering and voting irregularities to cast the election into doubt.

Conclusion: The court categorically denied every petition filed by the petitioners, holding that they did not satisfy the appropriate level of evidence for their numerous claims and that allegations of irregularity – real or otherwise – must be significant enough to have affected the final result of the election. While the Court affirmed its commitment to hearing all allegations of fraud and election malfeasance, it found no widespread evidence of interference in this case. Specifically, the Court determined that the petitioners presented no credible evidence that the IEBC or a third party fraudulently altered ballots or illegally accessed or altered electronic voting system data, writing, “[n]ot a single document had been presented by the 1st petitioner to prove systematic ballot stuffing.” The Court also held that the petitioners submitted video logs that were either from a previous election in 2017 or were “outright forgeries.” Further, the Court affirmed that even if there had been small, isolated incidents of interference, the evidence did not show that such interference altered the outcome of the election. The Court held that such issues should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, but the level of fraud present in this election did not mandate a nullification of the results.

Legal Issue(s)

Civil Procedure
Disputing Results
Electoral Administration Irregularities
Electoral Integrity
Electronic Voting
EMB Operation

Applicable Law(s): Constitution of Kenya, 2010, articles 101, 136(2)(a), 177(1) and 180(1); Elections Act, section 55B Election Offences Act, No. 37 of 2016

Region: Africa

Country: Kenya

Language of Decision

English

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Sep 5, 2022

Geolocation

Latitude: -1.3383790223516616

Longitude: 36.83349564671517

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Odinga, et al. v. Ruto CASE.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Odinga, et. al v. Ruto

Primary Documents

Notifications