Supreme Court throws out Wajackoyah plea to join presidential petition
By Steve Otieno
The Supreme Court Tuesday rejected Roots party presidential candidate Prof George Wajackoyah's request to take part in the presidential petition challenging the declaration of William Ruto as president-elect.
This happened during the pre-trial conference of the presidential petition seeking nullification of the presidential results announced on August 15 by Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) chairperson Wafula Chebukati.
Moments before closure of the proceedings, Prof Wajackoyah presented his case before the Supreme Court judges. He also complained that his lawyers had been barred form accessing the room yet he was a presidential candidate who had been mentioned as an interested party in one of the petitions.
He then requested the judges to allow him enjoin the presidential petition on grounds that he had been greatly affected in the elections.
“I pray to be given an opportunity, in your discretion so that I can be enjoined to speak through my counsel on case number seven in which I was mentioned as a interested party. I have already submitted my responses and in this room, in the absence of Raila Amolo Odinga (Azimio la Umoja One Kenya coalition flag bearer) and Ruto, I think I am the most aggrieved person here,” Prof Wajackoyah said.
“Despite the fact that we have other interested parties, you should take cognisance that I have vied in this country. I have traversed this country and I am seriously injured and I should be given an opportunity under exceptional circumstances if any.”
For there to be justice, Prof Wajackoyah said, the judges needed to “look beyond the mirror so that when people talk of fairness, fairness should start with me in this room.”
However, Justices Mohamed Ibrahim and William Ouko, on behalf of the other seven judges, clarified that whereas the Roots Party leader was an admired politician in the country, the timeline for submitting presidential petitions had lapsed and as such, his request could not be allowed by the court.
“Under the law, at Article 140 of the Constitution, if aggrieved as a candidate, the first opportunity, you have a right under the law to file a petition challenging the validity within a week and you did not do that, so with respect, you have to bear the consequences. Thank you,” Justice Ibrahim said.
Justice Ouko then explained that barring Prof Wajackoyah’s lawyer from addressing the court was in line with directions issued regarding the use of the courtroom, which only allowed lawyers directly involved in the petition into the room.
“We issued directions regarding the use of this courtroom and explained why we only have so many lawyers allowed here. One, the space itself. Two, the Covid-19 protocols that requires some social distancing and number three is security,” said Justice Ouko.
Prof Wajackoyah, who is an advocate of the High Court, primarily practises as an immigration lawyer.
