After an intense week dominated by televised legal hearings the Supreme Court is set to deliver a consequential ruling about the presidential election.
Eight petitions challenged the conduct of the poll, all calling for its nullification including one arguing that none of the presidential candidates garnered the requisite 50% +1 of votes cast.
Some also alleged interference during the results transmission process including vote tampering, but the electoral commission’s lawyers put up a strong defence against the claims.
The judges will either confirm William Ruto as president-elect, order a repeat election or a runoff between the main candidates.
A re-run will give former Prime Minister Raila Odinga another shot at the presidency, but it will undoubtedly create a crisis because the electoral body team is divided – after four of its seven commissioners argued in court that the procedures leading to the result of the 9 August poll were “opaque”.
They accused the chairman Wafula Chebukati of running a one-man show.
Mr Odinga has also said he would not participate in an election run by Mr Chebukati.
A fresh election will also be a setback to Mr Ruto – who has in the last two weeks transformed from a candidate to focusing on forming a government.
Several commentaries leading to Monday’s much-awaited ruling have been critical of the now, almost inevitable, some say meddling, role of the Supreme Court in Kenya’s election process.
But that’s exactly how it should be, born out of the crisis of the 2007 post-election violence, a new constitution gives election losers the right to take their case to court, even if some perceive their claims as frivolous.
It may be frustrating, but it should be the only way of resolving election disputes.
In 2017, before delivering the majority ruling that annulled that year’s election, then chief justice David Maraga famously said: “The greatness of any nation lies in its fidelity to the constitution and adherence to the rule of law and above all respect to God.”
The decision was celebrated and criticised in equal measure, but it set the standard for election conduct; that illegalities and irregularities would not be tolerated.
As the court retired to write the ruling last week on Friday, Mr Maraga’s successor Martha Koome asked Kenyans to pray for the judges as they consider to “render a judgement that promotes our constitution, that is anchored in the law, that nurtures our democracy and that brings harmony to our country”.
Whatever the seven judges decide; unanimously or not, Kenyans should be proud that they have created a respected institution that arbitrates high stakes political contests.
Many countries around the world wish they had similar institutions. The challenge for Kenya, as for any democracy, is to ensure that everyone respects and adheres to the court’s decision.
Mr Odinga and Mr Ruto have both said they would accept the final ruling, whichever ways it goes. I think that’s worth applauding.
