Sonko opposes new evidence in petition challenging his election

Nairobi County Governor Mike Sonko has strongly opposed an application by a voter seeking to nullify his election of August 8 2017.

He told election court judge Msagha Mbogholi, that the petitioner Japhaet Moroko lacks capacity to apply for an order to scrutinize the election materials used during the General Election on August 8, 2017.

The Governor through his lawyers Cecil Miller and Harrison Kinyanjui, told the judge that the application by the petitioner further seeking to file new affidavit should not be allowed.

“The petitioner cannot now seek to adduce new evidence which he ought to have filed together with election petition” the High Court heard.

Sonko also submitted that there are several illegalities in the petition before the court, saying the second petitioner Koitamet ole Kina has not signed his affidavit has required by election Act further adding that the averment by Moroko is not supported by any exhibits.

The lawyers said that what is contained in the averment of the petitioners is just hearsay.

They added, the petitioners ought to disclose to the court where they have gotten new evidence which cannot be accepted after the period to file such affidavit is long gone.

“The petition before the court is vitally defective and cannot be amended as the time do so is long gone” the court heard.

The presiding judge was told that, the court cannot be allowed to proceed to hearing on a defective petition the same should be struck out with cost to the respondents.
election offence.

However the petitioner’s lawyer Anthony Oluoch, said that contrary to assertion by the defense lawyers the petition is signed and material evidence has been annexed to the petition.

The petitioners contended that the election of Nairobi County Governor was not fairly conducted as required by the election Act and that election forms were not properly signed by officers recognized by law.

He told the court that returning officers in some polling stations did not sign forms 36 and 37 A, thus making the whole exercise a nullity.

The forms are either dated or signed and hence they do not capture the correct result of the election that took place on August 8, 2017.

He argued elections forms are very important in the election, saying whereas it has been pointed out that they were not signed by the agents and returning officers in some polling stations the court need to issue the order for scrutiny.

The judge will issue a ruling on the application seeking scrutiny on December 18, 2017.

This article was published by CAPITAL FM NEWS on December 14, 2017