32 [309] It was the petitioners’ submissions that the above impugned section is discriminatory in as much as the coalition political party is not subject to the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal. In their argument, they referred to the impugned section 40(3) of the Political Parties Act which reads as follows: “A coalition agreement shall provide for internal dispute resolution mechanism” [310] It is our finding that nowhere in the impugned amendment does the Act exempt a coalition political party from the jurisdiction of the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal. A political party is defined to include a coalition political party, hence a dispute between a political party and a coalition political party is deemed to be a dispute between political parties under section 40(1)(c) of the Act. It is therefore deemed to be a dispute subject to trial by the Tribunal. We therefore find that the plea by the petitioners in respect of that amendment cannot stand. 2.4.1.1.3 An integral feature of the IDRM is respect for the fair hearing rights of members of political parties. A member of a political party can only be expelled from its membership after he/she has been afforded a fair hearing in accordance with the political party’s Constitution or Rules (Section 14B, Political Parties Act; Hon. Aisha Jumwa Katana v ODM, PPDT Complaint No. 1 of 2019; and Hon Isaac Mwaura Maiga v Jubilee Party & 3 Others, Nairobi High Court Civil Appeal No. E248 of 2021). 2.4.1.1.4 The existence of a coalition political party does not extinguish the rights of each individual member of a political party. In In Salesio Mutuma Thuranira & 4 Others v Attorney General & 2 Others; Registrar of Political Parties & 4 Ohers (Interested Parties), Petition E043, E057 & E109 of 2022, the High Court clarified the position of coalition political parties as follows: ... we find that the creation of a coalition political party does not curtail the enjoyment of the citizens’ political rights under Article 38 of the Constitution because each constituent political party remains in existence with its operational constitution, its rights and status. Members of the parties retain their right to participate in the activities of the respective parties. 2.4.1.1.5 On disputes listed in Section 40(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e) of the Political Parties Act, aggrieved persons are required to first exhaust the IDRM. Failure to do so could lead to dismissal of a subsequent complaint in another court or tribunal (s 40(2), Political Parties Act; Dr Lilian Gogo v Joseph Mboya Nyamuthe & 4 Others, Nairobi Civil Appeal No. 135 of 2017; Samuel Kalii Kiminza v Jubilee Party & Another, Civil Appeal No. 157 of 2017; Gabriel Uminda Olenje & 4 Others v Orange Democratic Movement & Another, Nairobi Election Petition No. 67 of 2017 (being a judgment which upheld a similar decision by the PPDT in Complaint No. 85 of 2017); Ibrahim Abdi Ali v Mohamed Abdi Farah & Another, Complaint No 29 of 2015; Jared Kaunda Chokwe Barns v Orange Democratic Movement & 2 Others, Complaint No. 259 of 2017; Hon. Kieru John Wambui & Another v Jubilee Party; Secretary General, Jubilee Party & 2 Others (Interested Parties), PPDT Complaint No. E005 of 2021; Clerk Nairobi City County Assembly v Speaker Nairobi City County Assembly & Another; Orange Democratic Party & 4 Others (Interested Parties), ELRC Petition No. 194 of 2019; Republic v Speaker, West Pokot County Assembly & 2 Others Exparte David Pkeu Kapeliswa & Another; Kenya African National Union (KANU) (Interested Party), Judicial Review No. 4 of 2020; Maendeleo Chap Chap v The Registrar of Political Parties & Others, PPDT Complaint No. E060 Of 2022 (Consolidated With PPDT Complaint E016 of 2022); and Martin Mugo Maina v The Registrar Of Political Parties and Others (Azimio La Umoja One Kenya Coalition). 2.4.1.1.6 Where a political party neglects, refuses or otherwise fails to activate its IDRM, aggrieved members can refer their disputes to the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) (Stephen BENCH BOOK ON ELECTORAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION