71 was not defined by the statute. For candidates in presidential and gubernatorial elections (including deputies), the requirement was that the post-secondary qualification take the form of a degree from a university recognised in Kenya. In Johnson Muthama v Minister for Justice & Constitutional Affairs & Another, Petition Nos 198, 166 & 172 of 2011 (Consolidated) – challenging sections 3(1), 22(1)(b), 22(2), 23(1)(b), 24(1)(b), 25(1)(b) and 26(1) of the Elections Act for limiting the number of people who could contest for elective office – the Court took the view that by requiring post-secondary school educational qualifications and omitting to make more explicit provisions with regard to moral and ethical qualifications required under the Constitution, Parliament had misdiagnosed the real cause of the problem in Kenya’s governance: lack of leaders with integrity. At para 58, the Court – in relation to the requirements for parliamentary elections candidates – stated: A requirement for a post-secondary qualification does not address the real concern of the citizenry; indeed, it violates the provisions of the Constitution by excluding many who may not, through no fault of their own, have been able to achieve post-secondary education. 3.5.4.2 The Court found sections 22(1)(b) and section 24(1)(b) of the Elections Act 2011, which barred persons not holding a post-secondary school qualification from being nominated as candidates for elective office or for nomination to Parliament, unconstitutional. 3.5.4.3 These requirements were suspended until the 2017 elections, upon enactment of section 22(2A) of the Elections Act vide the Elections (Amendment) Act No. 48 of 2012. The educational requirements for President, Deputy President, Governor and Deputy Governor remained immediately implementable. 3.5.4.4 In John Harun Mwau v IEBC & Another, Constitutional Petition 26 of 2013, the petitioner challenged, inter alia, the constitutionality of the requirement to hold post-secondary school education and asserted that any academic qualification would be sufficient. The Court found this position untenable for two reasons. First, the nature of duties and functions to be performed by Parliament demanded higher educational qualifications, skills and exposure gained through higher education. Second, section 22 had been enacted pursuant to Article 99 of the Constitution, which envisaged the setting of an educational threshold for those who sought election to Parliament. This requirement, in the view of the Court, was neither unreasonable nor unattainable as Kenyans from all walks of life had the opportunity to gain this qualification. In the words of the Court: …post-secondary education as was enshrined under the said section 22(1)(b) of the Elections Act is attainable, sufficient and constitutional. To hold otherwise would be absurd after 50 years of independence. 3.5.4.5 This was confirmed by the Court of Appeal in John Harun Mwau v IEBC & Another, Civil Appeal 112 of 2014: …standards in regards to education qualifications for leaders seeking positions of power and responsibility cannot be discriminatory as it cuts across parties and those who do not qualify have an opportunity to seek first of all to attain the qualifications before vying for the offices. 3.5.4.6 In Okiya Omtatah Okoiti & Another v Attorney General & Another, Constitutional Petition No. 161 of BENCH BOOK ON ELECTORAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION