Presidential election challengers must prove more than voting irregularities to overturn a declared result, Supreme Court Judge William Ouko has said, stressing that serious breaches require credible evidence.

📋 Breaking It Down

Justice Ouko said petitioners must demonstrate that alleged illegalities either affected the result or damaged the election’s integrity so fundamentally that no reasonable court could uphold it.

He spoke at the Catholic University of Eastern Africa on Tuesday during a public lecture.

“The onus is on the Petitioner to prove that the election was so badly conducted and marred with irregularities and illegalities that it does not matter who was declared the winner. In other words, the election was marred by many irregularities, the cumulative effect of which fundamentally and negatively impacted the integrity of the election,” he said.

📌 What You Need to Know

“It is not every infraction of the law that will lead to nullification of an election,” he added, recalling that before the 2010 Constitution, presidential disputes faced procedural obstacles.

In the 1997 challenge, Mwai Kibaki’s petition against President Daniel arap Moi was dismissed for want of personal service.

Also Read:  Revisiting historic nullification of presidential results one year later

Justice Ouko said the decision illustrated a system unable to offer a substantive avenue for resolving disputes over the presidential mandate.

The weaknesses became more serious after the disputed 2007 election and the violence that followed. The Kriegler Commission reported concerns over public confidence in electoral and judicial institutions.

Mr Ouko said the crisis showed that unresolved electoral disputes could move from constitutional institutions into the political arena.

📰 Source: Nation Africa