The high-stakes case involving nominees for the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission took a fresh twist on Monday, May 19, after the High Court temporarily stopped the vetting process.

In a ruling on Monday, the High Court issued conservatory orders blocking vetting and approval of President William Ruto's IEBC picks by the National Assembly, pending the determination of a petition filed by two individuals.

As per the court ruling, vetting of the nominees cannot take place at least until May 29.

This was the latest setback in the quest to set up a new commission ahead of the 2027 general election, coming barely a fortnight after the petition was filed on May 14.

IEBC Chairperson position nominee Erastus Edung Ethekon during a past event.

Photo

Judiciary

Earlier in the month, President Ruto nominated Erastus Edung Ethekon as the next IEBC chairperson, while Anne Nderitu, Moses Mukwana, Mary Karen Sorobit, Hassan Noor, Francis Odhiambo, and Fahima Abdalla were nominated as commissioners.

Since the nominees were named, there has been a legal lens on the legality of the nominations, with two citizens moving to court to quell the process on several grounds, including allegations that the nominations were made without proper public participation as directed in the infamous NADCO report. 

The petitioners, from a civil society group, also claimed that some names on the IEBC interview list were included unconstitutionally and raised concerns about interference from the Executive.

“That the nominations are not only illegal but also unconstitutional for failing the requirements of public appointments as espoused under Articles 10, 232 and 250(3) & (4) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, as read with the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission Act and the Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) Act, Chapter 7F, Laws of Kenya,” the petition read in part. 

President Ruto’s nominees were dealt their first serious blow on Friday, May 16, after Milimani Law Courts Judge Lawrence Mugambi on Friday ordered that the petition and supporting documents filed by the civil society group be served to all respondents within seven days.

After the ruling on Monday, two things could happen ahead of May 29. If the petition is still under consideration by May 29, the court could decide to extend the conservatory orders.

On the opposite end, the court could decide to lift the orders if there are no sufficient grounds to halt the vetting. This would pave way for the National Assembly to proceed with the vetting and approval.