111 4.5.5 Thus, as per the aforesaid section 78(3), payment of security of costs within the prescribed time is an essential prerequisite for the hearing of election petitions. However, there are two prevailing views on the consequences of the failure to comply with this requirement. 4.5.6 The first view is that the requirement to deposit security for costs is not a mere procedural requirement capable of being excused as a matter of judicial discretion, and that failure to deposit the security within the prescribed time is fatal to the election petition (Said Buya Hiribae v Hassan Dukicha Abdi & 2 Others, Mombasa Election Petition No. 7 of 2013; Kumbatha Naomi Cidi v County Returning Officer, Kilifi & 3 Others, Malindi Election Petition No. 13 of 2013; and Simon Kiprop Sang v Zakayo K. Cheruyot & 2 Others, Nairobi Election Petition No. 1 of 2013). 4.5.7 The second view is that while the depositing of security for costs is an essential prerequisite for the hearing of an election petition, the time within which this must be done is a procedural requirement and, accordingly, courts have a discretion to enlarge the time for depositing the security (Fatuma Zainabu Mohamed v Ghati Dennitah & 10 Others, Kisii Election Petition No. 6 of 2013; Charles Maywa Chedotum & Another v IEBC & 2 Others, Kitale Election Petition No. 11 of 2013). The Court in Samwel Kazungu Kambi & Another v Nelly Llongo County Returning Officer, Kilifi County & 3 Others, Malindi Election Petition 4 & 5 of 2017(consolidated), opined as follows: [25.] Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 96 leaves no doubt as to the fact that unless a deposit of security for costs is made within ten days from the date of presenting the referendum petition, the petition shall be struck out. Unlike Section 96(2) and (3) which commands the striking out of a referendum petition if no security for costs is deposited, Section 78(3) puts an election petition in comatose if no security for costs is deposited. My understanding is that an election petition can be revived, with the leave of the court, upon payment of the security deposit so long as the period for hearing the petition has not lapsed. Nothing would have been easier for Parliament than to use the language used in Section 96 in Section 78 if the intention was to completely take away the discretion of an election court to enlarge time. I therefore agree with Edward M. Muriithi, J that if sufficient cause is shown, an election court has jurisdiction to extend the time for depositing security for costs in an election petition. 4.5.8 In Charles Ong’ondo Were v Joseph Oyugi Magwanga & 3 Others, Homa Bay Election Petition No. 1 of 2013), the court explained the rule as follows: I would have found favour with this position [i.e. dismissal of the petition] were it not for the provisions of s. 78 (3) of the Elections Act which presumes that the court may exercise discretion in favour of a petitioner who has not deposited the security and against who an objection has been raised. It is only once the objection is not removed that no further proceedings can be taken. Here even before the objection had been taken the deposit had been paid so there will be no issue of removing the objection. For that reason, this court shall on this occasion save the petition by not allowing the preliminary objection and the Notice of Motion which both sought its dismissal on the issue of the deposit. 4.5.9 An election court will not strike out an election petition for failure to comply with the requirement for depositing security for costs where it appears that the court registry has been accepting deposits of amounts smaller than that which is prescribed under the law and the petitioner has paid that smaller amount within the time prescribed for depositing security for costs (Jonas Misto Vincent Kuko v Wafula Wekesa & Another, Kitale Election Petition No. 9 of 2013). 4.5.10 Where there are two or more petitioners, only a single deposit of security for costs needs to be made (Thomas Malinda Musau & 2 Others v IEBC & 2 Others, Election Petition (Machakos) No. BENCH BOOK ON ELECTORAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION