case, the 1st Interested Party would have taken measures to implement the two thirds gender principle. 90. It was her case that the Respondent was well within the law in requiring 1st Interested Party to comply with its notice in conformity with the judgment in the Katiba Case. 91. She deposed that political parties have the obligation to ensure there is compliance with the two-thirds gender rule by putting in place measures including formulation of rules and regulations. 92. On the foregoing, she stated that political parties cannot wilfully fail to comply with the orders of the Court in the Katiba Case and then seek to benefit from Court’s protection in default of their noncompliance. 93. Ms. Ireri deposed that the proper remedy for the Petitioners would have been to appeal against the Katiba Case and pray for suspension of the implementation of the said Judgment. The Submissions: 94. In its written submissions dated 20th May, 2022, the 2nd Interested Party submitted that the Respondent’s letter dated 5th May, 2022 requiring compliance by political parties within 48 hours was not ultra-vires its mandate. 95. It was its case that the Commission was simply executing its constitutional and statutory mandate as per the terms of the Katiba Case. 96. It was submitted that the 1st Interested Party's failure in designing and implementing the two-thirds gender principle within its internal organization cannot be blamed on the Respondent. 97. It asserted that the Petitioner's claim that the Respondent failed to devise administrative mechanism is a deliberate distortion and or suppression of the facts and the law relating to the impugned judgment since the judgment placed upon the political parties the Judgment – Nairobi High Court Constitutional Petitions No. E211 of 2022 & JR No. E071 OF 2022 Page 18 of 59