Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Election Petition 1 of 2013 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | Joseph Kiponda v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & Stephen Bahati Mlanda |
| Date Delivered: | 10 Jul 2013 |
| Case Class: | Civil |
| Court: | Election Petition in Magistrate Courts |
| Case Action: | Ruling |
| Judge(s): | Y A Shikanda |
| Citation: | Joseph Kiponda v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & another [2013] eKLR |
| Advocates: | Mr Kabue for Petitioner Ms Ndegwa for 1st Respondent Mr Oduor for 2nd Respondent |
| Court Division: | Constitutional and Judicial Review |
| County: | Kilifi |
| Advocates: | Mr Kabue for Petitioner Ms Ndegwa for 1st Respondent Mr Oduor for 2nd Respondent |
| History Advocates: | Both Parties Represented |
| Case Outcome: | Allowed |
| Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE'S COURT
AT MALINDI
ELECTION PETITION NO. 1 OF 2013
IN THE MATTER OF THE ELECTION ACT, 2011 LAWS OF KENYA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE ELECTION FOR THE GANDA COUNTY ASSEMBLY
REPRESENTATIVE FOR GANDA WARD WITHIN MALINDI CONSTITUENCY OF KILIFI COUNTY
BETWEEN
JOSEPH KIPONDA................................................................................PETITIONERAND
THE INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND
BOUNDARIES COMMISSION....................................................1ST RESPONDENT
STEPHEN BAHATI MLANDA....................................................2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
The Petitioner herein filed an application dated 13/6/13 seeking orders for scrutiny and or recount of all the votes cast in respect of County Assembly Representative for Ganda County Assembly ward within Malindi Constituency. The application is opposed by the Respondents. I have carefully considered the application and given due regard to the parties' submissions. In my considered view, the issues raised by the Petitioner in his application and Supporting affidavits cannot be determined by way of affidavit evidence. They are issues that can only be addressed by way of viva voce evidence. It would therefore be too early in the day for the court to order a scrutiny and recount of the votes cast in respect of the Election in dispute.
In view of the foregoing, I do not find it appropriate to allow the application at this stage. Consequently, I give the following directions:
(a) That the petition shall proceed to hearing as scheduled;
(b) That the witnesses shall be examined on the contents of their affidavits in support of the petition and the affidavits in support or in opposition to the application dated 13/6/13, which affidavits shall be the evidence in-chief of the respective witnesses;
(c ) That the parties are at liberty to canvass the issues raised in the application dated 13/6/13 at the time of hearing of the petition;
(d) That after the evidence by all the parties has been heard, the court will thereafter make a determination as to whether nor not there will be scrutiny and recount of all or part of the votes cast in respect of the Election in dispute.
(e) The issue of costs of the application dated 13/6/13 shall await the above said determination.
Dated at Malindi this 10th day of July 2013.
Y.A. SHIKANDA
Ag. SENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATE
Delivered in open court in the presence of:
Mr Kabue for Petitioner
Ms Ndegwa for 1st Respondent
Mr Oduor for 2nd Respondent
Y.A. SHIKANDA
Ag. SENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATE
10/7/13
Please Wait. Searching ...