Philomena Mwilu causes Confusion after denying her Supreme Court ruling

mary kulundu

October 10, 2017 10:45 AM

Shocking declaration by Deputy Chief Justice

Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu on Monday stirred confusion at the apex court after denying a ruling she made in the presidential petition that saw President Uhuru Kenyatta’s win nullified.

Mwilu made the perplexing remarks when IEBC Chairman Wafula Chebukati moved to the Supreme Court seeking clarification on a ruling the judges made.

Chebukati, who was being represented by Senior Counsel Paul Muite, moved to the court to know if he has powers to correct errors and amend Forms 34A and B.

According to Maina Kiai’s case, the results at the polling station were declared final but in the presidential petition, Chebukati was faulted for not verifying the results received at the National Tallying Centre.

Hence the electoral body chair mentioned that he did not understand what he ought to do in case there were discrepancies in Forms 34A and B received at the National Tallying Centre during the fresh presidential poll.

However, Judge Mwilu told Muite that she does not recall ruling that the Chair should verify the forms.

"Did we say, touch or move a coma, change figures? Did we say that in our judgment? Where? I don't remember saying that and I know I participated in that judgment," Mwilu was quoted by the Star.

The deputy CJ noted that she does not understand what clarification Chebukati was seeking.

"Where the problem is what is it that we are required to clarify?" she posed.

In a rejoinder, Muite stated: “We are seeking a clarification on how the presidential returning officer should go about the function of verifying the results before announcing the winner."

At the same time Chief Justice David Maraga directed Mr Muite to to read Section 39( 1 ) (c) of the Elections Act which stipulates:"For purposes of a presidential election the Commission shall electronically transmit, in the prescribed form, the tabulated results of an election for the President from a polling station to the constituency tallying centre and to the national tallying centre".

A spot check by Pulse Live Kenya into the majority ruling that nullified the presidential results established that the four judges ruled that the IEBC boss failed to verify the forms.

“Regulation 87(1)(b) requires the Constituency returning officer to deliver to the National Tallying Centre all the Forms 34A from the respective polling stations and the summary collation forms. Regulation 87(3)(a) goes on to provide that, upon the receipt of Form 34A from the Constituency returning officer, the Chairperson of the Commission shall verify the results against Forms 34A and 34B received from the Constituency returning officer,” the ruling read in part.

mary kulundu