Why High Court's Decision on Ballot Papers was Wrong - PLO Lumumba Explains
High Court did wrong in cancelling the printing of presidential ballot papers, PLO Lumumba explains
During an exclusive interview with Plive.co.ke, Mr Lumumba stated that the ruling was unsound.
The seasoned lawyer divulged that the judges had completely misapprehended the law while making the decision.
According to the former KACC boss, it was dumbfounding that the court could agree with one portion of the contract but not another.
"As a lawyer that decision is jurisprudentially very unsound. It is a decision that many commentators, scholars and practitioners will have many things to say.
"I cannot understand how judges looking at a contract decide that one portion of the contract is good and another is bad. That you can proceed to print papers relating to Gubernatorial, Senatorial, MP, Women Rep and MCA but the presidential is unique and very different," he said.
The Prof added: "That I find very curious because in my view the judges completely miss apprehended the law and I look forward when that hearsay will be taken by a Superior Court".
On July 7, a three-judge bench led by Justice Joel Njagi cancelled the tender awarded to a Dubai-based firm, Al Ghurair Printing and Publication company for printing the presidential ballot papers.
The Court ordered the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission to identify a new supplier by re-advertising the tender.
According to the ruling, the electoral body did not follow the Public Participation process required for procurement.
The case was filed by the National Super Alliance (NASA) who told the court that IEBC did not adhere to the stipulated procedure.
NASA also argued that owners of Al Ghurair had close ties to President Uhuru Kenyatta.
However, the court dismissed this argument noting that the Opposition's lawyer failed to present substantial proof of the existing relationship.
JOIN OUR PULSE COMMUNITY!
Eyewitness? Submit your stories now via social or: