SDT nullifies KRU elections

SDT Chairman John Ohaga

Sports Disputes Tribunal chairman John Ohaga addressing the media in Nairobi in the past.

Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group

What you need to know:

  • The Tribunal has since ordered for fresh elections within 60 days and conducted by an independent panel consisting of two members, male and female, appointed by the KRU board.
  • There should also be one representative from Kenya Cup, one representative from Championship side, one representative from women rugby and that the chief executive officer of KRU to be secretary but with no voting rights.

Sports Disputes Tribunal (SDT) has nullified the Kenya Rugby Union (KRU) elections held September last year after it failed to meet the threshold with massive irregularities.

In a ruling on Tuesday, SDT indicated that the election of Joshua Aroni as the treasurer, Ian Mugambi as secretary general and Oscar Mango as a director is null and void.

SDT reprimanded Sports Registrar Rose Wasike for interfering with the elections, adding that the elections fell short on the notice.

Former KRU director Ray Olendo, through Kinoti and Kibe Company Advocates, had sought redress following the elections held on September 6, 2022 at the RFUEA ground.

The Tribunal has since ordered for fresh elections within 60 days and conducted by an independent panel consisting of two members, male and female, appointed by the KRU board.

There should also be one representative from Kenya Cup, one representative from Championship side, one representative from women rugby and that the chief executive officer of KRU to be secretary but with no voting rights.

“There was lack of an independent election panel, interference by the 8th Respondent (Sports Registrar and lack of transparency,” said the ruling, adding that there was interference by observers for instance the ninth respondent (Paula Lanco), which was unconstitutional.

“Ineligible members were allowed to vote,” stated the ruling adding that the Sports Registrar was not within her constitutional mandate to interfere with the elections.

While members eligible to vote shall be as the eligibility set out in the KRU Constitution, SDT noted that KRU Constitution is inconsistent with the Constitution, Sports Act, and Registrar’s Regulations.