The Supreme Court on Monday upheld President-elect William Ruto’s victory in the August 9th presidential election.
The seven-judge bench unanimously ruled that Ruto was validly elected as president, paving the way for his swearing-in on September 13th.
"This is a unanimous decision of the court and we make the following orders; The presidential election petition number E005 of 2022 as consolidated with presidential election petition numbers E001, 2, 3,4,7 and 8 of 2022 are hereby dismissed," Chief Justice Martha Koome read the ruling.
"As a consequence, we declare the election of the first respondent as President-elect to be valid under Article 143 of the Constitution. This being a matter cutting across the public interest, we order that each party bear their own cost. It is so ordered."
The judges said that the petitioners failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there was electoral malfeasance to warrant annulment.
“Any irregularities were not of such magnitude as to affect the final results of the presidential election.”
The court found that the technology used by the Independent and Electoral Boundaries Commission (IEBC) met the standards of “integrity, verifiability, security and transparency”.
The court said it did not find any evidence of hacking and that no evidence was produced to show that IEBC chairman Wafula Chebukati and other IEBC officials were involved.
No significant differences were found between forms uploaded on the IEBC portal and forms delivered to the National Tallying Centre at Bomas of Kenya, the court said.
"No credible evidence was given to show forms given to agents were different," CJ Koome said.
The court also found affidavits by two of Azimio presidential candidate Raila Odinga's experts not admissible.
"There is nothing to show that Mr Odinga asked the two people to swear affidavits. We must remind counsel who appear before this court or any other court that swearing to falsehoods is a criminal offence," Koome said.
Equally, the contents of the affidavit of John Mark Githongo were dismissed, with the court indicating that it may have contained falsehoods.
"No admissible evidence was presented to show that forms 34A were manipulated. The affidavits amount to double hearsay," Justice Koome said.
The judges were also not convinced that the IEBC was targeting voter suppression by postponing elections in certain areas.
"The absence of any empirical data bars the court from finding that IEBC suppressed voting in Mr Odinga strongholds," she said.
On the alleged variances in votes cast for President and other elective positions, the court determined that not a single document was presented by the first petitioner to prove ballot stuffing.
"Fraud is a serious criminal offence and it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. IEBC has provided a plausible explanation showing categories of voters like diaspora and prisons, who only vote for President. None of the parties has flagged anything so significant that it would have affected the outcome. There were no unexplainable variances in votes cast for President and other elective positions," Koome said.
The court further determined that the four commissioners who rejected the results of the presidential election and staged a walkout were actively involved in the tallying and verification exercise from the beginning until just before the declaration of the final results by the Chairperson.
The court further ruled that four commissioners did not table any document to show that the elections result was altered.
"Are we to nullify an election on the basis of a last minute rapture the details of which remain scanty? This we cannot do," said koome.
On whether Ruto attained 50 percent plus one vote threshold, CJ Koome said: "We finds that no evidence was submitted to show that William Ruto did not attain the 50 per cent plus one vote requirement.
"It is our finding that the declared President-Elect attained 50% +1 of all the votes cast in accordance with article 138.4 of the constitution.”
President-elect Ruto is set to be sworn in next Tuesday in line with the Constitution which states that: “The President-elect shall be sworn in on the first Tuesday following the fourteenth day after the date of the declaration of the result of the presidential election if no petition has been filed under Article 140; or The seventh day following the date on which the court renders a decision declaring the election to be valid, if any petition has been filed under Article 140.”