7.6 C
New York
Monday, December 11, 2023

Buy now

Supreme Court rules on a case seeking to bar the swearing-in of Rigathi Gachagua

Supreme Court has dismissed a case seeking to bar the swearing-in of Rigathi Gachagua over integrity issues.

The supreme court has quashed a case brought by eleven activists questioning Rigathi Gachagua’s eligibility to serve as deputy president.

In a petition submitted by 11 activists, it was questioned whether William Ruto and Rigathi Gachagua were qualified to serve in such positions due to suspected integrity problems.

The apex court ruled it has no authority to address the issues raised by the activists as they should have filed the case at the High Court.

The activists, through lawyer Kibe Mungai, wanted the Supreme Court to stop the swearing-in of Dr. Ruto and Mr. Gachagua pending the determination of the suit. 

They wanted the Supreme Court to interpret the application of ethics and integrity law to persons seeking elective public offices.

They argued that Rigathi Gachagua was unsuitable to hold public office and the decision of William Ruto to nominate him as running-mate was invalid. 

Consequently, their participation in the presidential polls was illegal and their election was unconstitutional. 

However, the Supreme court dismissed the petition citing it null and void.

“The Notice of Motion dated August 5, 2022, and Petition dated August 5, 2022, are for the reasons given, incompetent and are hereby struck out,” the judgment read.

In addition, the Supreme Court ruled to reject a petition that sought to prevent William Ruto from taking the oath of office on September 13.

In a response to the petition, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) argued that the Supreme Court lacked the authority to address the petitioners’ concerns.

In a separate united response, Ruto, Gachagua, and the UDA Party made comparable claims, opining that the supreme court is not authorized to consider the matter.

They further claimed that the petitioner improperly and prematurely asserted the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to hear and decide constitutional disputes.

Also read,

African Union reaches out to Raila after Supreme Court ruling

Uhuru Kenyatta questions contradicting Supreme Court decisions in the 2017 and 2022 petitions

Ruto’s father-in-law to lead prayers in State House

Follow us



Stay Connected


Latest Articles