Why Kenya Supreme Court Rejected Raila Odinga’s Plea

Lack of evidence and forgery of documents are some of the reasons that moved the Supreme Court of Kenya judges to unanimously dismiss the petitions challenging the election of William Ruto as President.

The judges dismissed all the nine grounds they had broadly framed as the issues for determination in the election petitions filed by Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition Party presidential candidate Raila Odinga and six others.

With the ruling that Dr. Ruto, who received 7.2 million votes, or 50.49 percent of the total votes cast, was validly elected, he will be sworn in as the country’s fifth president on Tuesday. The seven judges unanimously found that Dr Ruto won fairly, despite the 23 bases of evidence listed in the 72-page petition filed by Mr Odinga and his vice presidential candidate Martha Karua.

Chief Justice Martha Koome read the verdict on behalf of her colleagues, including Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu and justices Njoki Ndung’u, Isaac Lenaola, Smokin Wanjala, Mohammed Ibrahim, and William Ouko.

The court determined that the petition was based, in part, on falsehoods by some lawyers and falsified online logs by a witness. The judges were outraged that false evidence was included in sworn affidavits.

“Affidavits filed in court must only deal with facts; swearing to falsehoods is a criminal offense,” said CJ Koome, referring to affidavits filed by lawyers Celestine Opiyo, Arnold Ochieng Oginga, and former corruption czar John Githongo.