46 bad precedent of election petitions not being heard in certain court stations (Amb. Ukur Yattani Kanacho v IEBC & 2 Others, Marsabit High Court Election Petition No. 2 of 2017). 2.4.4.5. Transfer of a petition filed in the wrong court to the appropriate registry, rather than striking it out, has also been ruled to be in line with the public interest nature of an election petition (Milkah Nanyokia Masungo v Robert Wekesa Mwembe & 2 Others, Bungoma Election Petition No. 1 of 2013). 2.4.4.6. Secondly, the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain an election petition filed later than 28 days following the declaration of election results (Lemanken Aramat v Harun Meitamei Lempaka & 2 Others, Supreme Court Petition No. 5 of 2014; Mary Wambui Munene v Peter Gichuki King’ara & 2 Others, Supreme Court Petition No. 7 of 2014; and Hassan Ali Joho & Another v Suleiman Said Shahbal & 2 Others, Supreme Court Petition No. 10 of 2013). The 28-day period starts running immediately the Returning Officer issues a certificate of election to the successful candidate (Mary Wambui Munene v Peter Gichuki King’ara & 2 Others, Supreme Court Petition No. 7 of 2014; Anami Silverse Lisamula v IEBC & 2 Others, Supreme Court Petition No. 8 of 2014; and Martha Wangari Karua v IEBC & 3 Others, Supreme Court Petition 3 of 2019). 2.4.4.7. To ensure compliance with these timelines, the Supreme Court issued the following guidelines in the Martha Karua case: (a) All Applications by a Respondent in an election petition, save in exceptional circumstances, should form part of the response to the Petition. Similarly, a Petitioner should as much as possible file any application arising from his Petition e.g. for scrutiny or recount at the same time as the Petition. (b) Unless for want of jurisdiction or in any other deserving circumstance, a trial Court should exercise restraint in striking out a Petition or a response, where such an action is likely to summarily dispose of the matter. (c) All applications for striking out an election petition for want of jurisdiction, or for any other reason, must be made and determined within the constitutional and statutory timelines for the resolution of electoral disputes. In this regard, it is for the trial Court, to make and enforce such case management orders, so as to meet this objective. (d) Appeals on interlocutory applications, other than for striking out in circumstances explained in (b) and (c) above, should await the final determination of the whole petition before the trial Court. (e) In exceptional circumstances, an appellate Court may dispose of an appeal arising from an interlocutory application filed and determined by the trial Court while the substantive matter is still ongoing at the trial Court. In doing so, the timeframe question as explained above must always be borne in mind. 2.4.4.8. Thirdly, the jurisdiction of the High Court in EDR is time bound to six months after the date of the filing of an election petition. In other words, the High Court ceases to have jurisdiction on an electoral dispute after the lapse of six months from the date of filing an election petition (Lemanken Aramat v Harun Meitamei Lempaka & 2 Others, Supreme Court Petition No. 5 of 2014). BENCH BOOK ON ELECTORAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION