Mutunga defends election ruling

From Left: Law society chairman Eric Mutua, Chief Justice Willy Mutunga and electoral commission boss Isaack Hassan during the launch of Handbook on Elections Disputes Friday. PHOTO | JEFF ANGOTE  

In Summary

• Dr Mutunga added that losers in an election could not say they were satisfied with a court’s decision.
• The law society chairman said the speed with which electoral petitions were concluded should be replicated in civil cases.

By LUCAS BARASA
More by this Author

Chief Justice Willy Mutunga has proposed a political mechanism to resolve election disputes instead of relying on courts.

He however said he had no regrets in the Supreme Court’s decision that upheld President Kenyatta’s win in the March 4 General Election.

But he said courts could not satisfy everybody in an election dispute in a country divided along tribe, clan, race, religion, class and culture.

Dr Mutunga added that losers in an election could not say they were satisfied with a court’s decision.

“How do you expect the court to decide a dispute and for the losers to say they are satisfied? How do you expect the court to convince the loser that there was justice? Let politicians deal with their s**t through other mechanisms to avoid destroying the Judiciary,” a livid Dr Mutunga said.

The CJ spoke during the launch of a Handbook on Elections Disputes in Kenya and the official handover of the Judiciary post-election report at Intercontinental Hotel in Nairobi Friday.

He said election disputes were denting the image of the Judiciary which the country has been trying
to build since 2007

.

LAWYERS UNHAPPY

The CJ said the Judiciary was under attack in 2007 leading to a new Constitution and “then came 2013 and the rest is history.”

On 30 March, the Supreme Court ruled that President Kenyatta won the elections and dismissed a petition by Cord leader Raila Odinga.

Dr Mutunga said there should be a political tribunal to address differences during elections and a decision reached through a culture of elite consensus to save the Judiciary from damage.

Dr Mutunga’s remarks came after Law Society of Kenya chairman Eric Mutua said some advocates were unhappy with the way the Supreme Court led by Dr Mutunga handled the presidential election petition.

“The bar feels it should have been handled in a different manner,” Mr Mutua said.

Mr Mutua however said that the Judiciary had done a commendable job in handling other electoral disputes.

The law society chairman said the speed with which electoral petitions were concluded should be replicated in civil cases.

The Independent Elections and Boundaries Commission chairman Issack Hassan said there’s no election without an element of dispute.

He also criticised late Appeal Court’s decisions which led to loss of tax-payers money.

Mr Hassan said one of the biggest headache for the commission were the strict timelines that put party primaries too close to the General Election.