Kenya: Supreme Court confirms Ruto’s victory against Odinga

Kenya's Chief Justice Martha Koome

Kenya’s Supreme Court upheld William Ruto’s victory in last month’s presidential election, dismissing his rival Raila Odinga’s claims that the vote was marred by rigging and irregularities.

Kenya’s Supreme Court upheld William Ruto’s victory in last month’s presidential election, dismissing his rival Raila Odinga’s claims that the vote was marred by rigging and irregularities.

The seven-member court found no discrepancies in the vote tallies and no credible evidence that the electoral commission’s computer systems and transmission network had failed or been breached, Chief Justice Martha Koome said in an abridged ruling handed down in Nairobi, the capital, on Monday.

Allegations that some citizens had been prevented from casting their votes or that ballot boxes were tampered with were unproven, she said. 

“It is our finding that the declared president-elect garnered 50% plus one of the votes cast” in accordance with the constitution, Koome said. “This is a unanimous decision of the court.” 

 The official results showed Ruto, who has served as deputy president since 2013, winning 50.5% support in the Aug. 9 vote and Odinga, a former prime minister, 48.8%. The judgment paves the way for Ruto, 55, to be sworn in as President Uhuru Kenyatta’s successor on Sept. 13. 

The eight petitions challenging the elections were all dismissed. The court found some were based on forged documents and “sensational information”, Chief Justice Martha Koome said in a unanimous decision on behalf of the seven judges.

No credible evidence that the electronic voting transmission system had been tampered with by “a middle man” was presented, she said.

While noting the “dysfunction” of the commission in managing its internal affairs,  the court said it was not convinced that the claims of the chairman running a one-man show was enough to undermine the election.

“Are we to nullify the outcome of an election on the basis of a last-minute boardroom rupture whose details remain scanty?” the judges asked.