12 ethnic diversity of the people of Kenya (Article 90(2) of the Constitution). In respect of County Assemblies, parties are required to ensure that the lists reflect the community and cultural diversity of the counties as well as ensuring adequate representation of minorities in accordance with Article 197 of the Constitution (s 7(2) County Governments Act 2012). 1.9.4.4 Inclusion of marginalised groups is also required at the party level. Political parties are required to respect the right of all persons to participate in the political process, including minorities and marginalised groups (Art 91 (1) (e)). Compliance with the inclusion mandate is one of the criteria for assessing eligibility to the Political Parties Fund. 15% of the Political Parties Fund is reserved for political parties based on the number of candidates from special interest groups elected in the preceding general election (s 25(1)(b) of the Political Parties Fund. Moreover, not less than 30% of the money allocated to a party under the Fund is required to be allocated to ‘promoting the representation in Parliament and in the county assemblies of women, persons with disabilities, youth, ethnic and other minorities and marginalised communities’ (s 26(1)(a) Political Parties Act 2011). 1.9.4.5 Before a political party can receive full registration, it is required to demonstrate inclusion in the following ways: (i) that its members reflect the regional and ethnic diversity, gender balance and representation of special interest groups; (ii) that the composition of its governing body reflects the regional and ethnic diversity, gender balance and representation of special interest groups; (iii) that not more than two-thirds of the members of the governing body of the party are of the same gender. (s 7 Political Parties Act 2011) 1.9.4.6 In Centre for Minority Rights Development (CEMIRIDE) & 2 others v Attorney General & 2 others; Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (Interested Party) Machakos Petition No E002 of 2022, the court found that the Integrated Political Parties Management System (IPPMS) adopted by the Office of the Registrar of Political Parties to manage the political parties’ membership register did not take into account the interests of minorities and marginalised groups. In the words of the court: 192. I find that the State developed the Integrated Political Parties Management System without adhering to the provisions of Article 56 of the Constitution. Not only should it have ensured that the system did not curtail the rights of the marginalised by putting in place alternative avenues through which the said communities would still realise their democratic rights but that the said alternatives were sufficiently brought home to those affected in good time to enable them take advantage of the said options. 193. I also agree with the Petitioners that currently there is no sufficient statutory or regulatory regime dealing with the rights of the marginalised groups or communities in this country. It may well be the dearth of such regimes that has confined the minorities and the marginalised communities to the periphery. I agree that in order for the rights contemplated under Articles 10, 56 and 91 of the Constitution to be realised, the State ought to take appropriate steps to make provisions that give meaningful effect to the same. The State cannot continue paying lip service to the constitutional provisions BENCH BOOK ON ELECTORAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION