Quote from Lawyer on July 10, 2025, 10:17 pmOn July 10, 2025, a significant ruling from a three-judge bench in Nairobi's High Court reshaped the landscape of Kenya's electoral governance. The court upheld the nominations of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) chairperson and commissioners but declared the formal gazette notice issued by President William Ruto to appoint them as unlawful. This decision, delivered by Justices Roselyne Aburili, John Chigiti, and Bahati Mwamuye, has sparked widespread discussion as Kenya prepares for the 2027 general elections.
The controversy began in May 2025 when activists Kelvin Roy Omondi and Boniface Mwangi filed a constitutional petition challenging the recruitment process for the IEBC chairperson and six commissioners. The petitioners argued that the selection process was marred by irregularities, lacked transparency, and violated constitutional provisions. Specifically, they raised concerns about the eligibility of some nominees, the absence of public participation, regional imbalance, and the failure to consult opposition parties as recommended by the National Dialogue Committee (NADCO).
On May 29, 2025, Justice Lawrence Mugambi issued interim conservatory orders barring the government from gazetting the appointments until the petition was resolved. Despite this, President Ruto proceeded to publish Gazette Notices No. 7724 and 7725 on June 10, 2025, appointing Erastus Edung Ethekon as IEBC chairperson and Ann Njeri Nderitu, Moses Alutalala Mukhwana, Mary Karen Sorobit, Hassan Noor Hassan, Francis Odhiambo Aduol, and Fahima Araphat Abdallah as commissioners, each for a six-year term.
The three-judge bench delivered a nuanced judgment, addressing both the procedural and substantive aspects of the case. The court dismissed the petitioners' substantive claims, finding insufficient evidence to invalidate the selection, nomination, and vetting processes. The judges affirmed that the selection panel adhered to constitutional standards, including requirements for merit-based appointments, regional and ethnic balance, and inclusivity.
However, the court ruled that President Ruto's gazette notices were unlawful because they violated the interim conservatory orders issued by Justice Mugambi. The judges emphasized that the timing and manner of the appointments disregarded ongoing judicial proceedings, rendering the gazette notices null and void. The court clarified that its decision did not question the suitability of the nominees but focused solely on the procedural breach.
The ruling provides a pathway for regularization. With the conservatory orders now lifted, the court noted that the appointing authorities are free to take appropriate constitutional steps to formalize the appointments. This means President Ruto can issue a fresh gazette notice in compliance with the law, allowing the nominees to be sworn in and assume their roles at the IEBC.
The decision comes at a critical juncture, as Kenya has been without a fully constituted IEBC since March 2023, following the resignation and retirement of previous commissioners. The absence of a functional electoral commission has delayed key processes, including continuous voter registration, constituency boundary reviews, and by-elections in several regions. The court's ruling paves the way for the IEBC to resume its mandate, provided the appointments are regularized swiftly.
The upheld nominees, led by Chairperson Erastus Ethekon, are tasked with restoring public confidence in the electoral body ahead of the 2027 elections. The court's affirmation of the nomination process addresses concerns about transparency and inclusivity, but the controversy surrounding the gazette notice has raised questions about executive adherence to judicial orders. Legal experts and civil society groups have called for strict compliance with the rule of law to prevent further erosion of trust in Kenya's democratic institutions.
The ruling has elicited varied responses. Supporters of the nominees argue that the decision validates the integrity of the selection process and clears the path for a functional IEBC. Critics, including the petitioners, maintain that the executive's defiance of court orders sets a dangerous precedent. Some political analysts speculate that the initial gazettement was a strategic move to expedite the IEBC's reconstitution, given the tight timeline before the 2027 elections.
The petitioners had previously sought to hold President Ruto, Attorney General Dorcas Odour, and Head of Public Service Felix Koskei in contempt of court for disregarding the May 29 orders. However, the court declined to pursue contempt charges in June 2025, citing procedural issues and the need for due process. This earlier ruling underscored the judiciary's commitment to fairness, even as it navigates politically charged cases.
The ball is now in President Ruto's court to issue a new gazette notice that complies with legal requirements. Once this is done, Chief Justice Martha Koome can administer the oath of office to the nominees, enabling them to begin their six-year terms. The IEBC will then face the daunting task of addressing pending electoral activities, including voter registration, boundary delimitation, and preparations for by-elections in constituencies such as Baringo, Banissa, Magarini, Ugunja, Malava, and Mbeere North.
The court's decision also highlights the judiciary's role as a guardian of constitutionalism in Kenya. By balancing the validation of the nomination process with the nullification of the unlawful gazette notice, the judges have reinforced the importance of adhering to legal procedures while ensuring that the electoral process moves forward.
The ruling marks a pivotal moment in Kenya's electoral journey. While it upholds the nominations of the IEBC chairperson and commissioners, it sends a clear message that executive actions must respect judicial orders. As the country awaits the regularization of these appointments, all eyes will be on the IEBC to deliver a transparent and credible electoral process in the lead-up to 2027. The decision underscores the delicate balance between political urgency and the rule of law, a balance that will shape Kenya's democratic future.
On July 10, 2025, a significant ruling from a three-judge bench in Nairobi's High Court reshaped the landscape of Kenya's electoral governance. The court upheld the nominations of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) chairperson and commissioners but declared the formal gazette notice issued by President William Ruto to appoint them as unlawful. This decision, delivered by Justices Roselyne Aburili, John Chigiti, and Bahati Mwamuye, has sparked widespread discussion as Kenya prepares for the 2027 general elections.
The controversy began in May 2025 when activists Kelvin Roy Omondi and Boniface Mwangi filed a constitutional petition challenging the recruitment process for the IEBC chairperson and six commissioners. The petitioners argued that the selection process was marred by irregularities, lacked transparency, and violated constitutional provisions. Specifically, they raised concerns about the eligibility of some nominees, the absence of public participation, regional imbalance, and the failure to consult opposition parties as recommended by the National Dialogue Committee (NADCO).
On May 29, 2025, Justice Lawrence Mugambi issued interim conservatory orders barring the government from gazetting the appointments until the petition was resolved. Despite this, President Ruto proceeded to publish Gazette Notices No. 7724 and 7725 on June 10, 2025, appointing Erastus Edung Ethekon as IEBC chairperson and Ann Njeri Nderitu, Moses Alutalala Mukhwana, Mary Karen Sorobit, Hassan Noor Hassan, Francis Odhiambo Aduol, and Fahima Araphat Abdallah as commissioners, each for a six-year term.
The three-judge bench delivered a nuanced judgment, addressing both the procedural and substantive aspects of the case. The court dismissed the petitioners' substantive claims, finding insufficient evidence to invalidate the selection, nomination, and vetting processes. The judges affirmed that the selection panel adhered to constitutional standards, including requirements for merit-based appointments, regional and ethnic balance, and inclusivity.
However, the court ruled that President Ruto's gazette notices were unlawful because they violated the interim conservatory orders issued by Justice Mugambi. The judges emphasized that the timing and manner of the appointments disregarded ongoing judicial proceedings, rendering the gazette notices null and void. The court clarified that its decision did not question the suitability of the nominees but focused solely on the procedural breach.
The ruling provides a pathway for regularization. With the conservatory orders now lifted, the court noted that the appointing authorities are free to take appropriate constitutional steps to formalize the appointments. This means President Ruto can issue a fresh gazette notice in compliance with the law, allowing the nominees to be sworn in and assume their roles at the IEBC.
The decision comes at a critical juncture, as Kenya has been without a fully constituted IEBC since March 2023, following the resignation and retirement of previous commissioners. The absence of a functional electoral commission has delayed key processes, including continuous voter registration, constituency boundary reviews, and by-elections in several regions. The court's ruling paves the way for the IEBC to resume its mandate, provided the appointments are regularized swiftly.
The upheld nominees, led by Chairperson Erastus Ethekon, are tasked with restoring public confidence in the electoral body ahead of the 2027 elections. The court's affirmation of the nomination process addresses concerns about transparency and inclusivity, but the controversy surrounding the gazette notice has raised questions about executive adherence to judicial orders. Legal experts and civil society groups have called for strict compliance with the rule of law to prevent further erosion of trust in Kenya's democratic institutions.
The ruling has elicited varied responses. Supporters of the nominees argue that the decision validates the integrity of the selection process and clears the path for a functional IEBC. Critics, including the petitioners, maintain that the executive's defiance of court orders sets a dangerous precedent. Some political analysts speculate that the initial gazettement was a strategic move to expedite the IEBC's reconstitution, given the tight timeline before the 2027 elections.
The petitioners had previously sought to hold President Ruto, Attorney General Dorcas Odour, and Head of Public Service Felix Koskei in contempt of court for disregarding the May 29 orders. However, the court declined to pursue contempt charges in June 2025, citing procedural issues and the need for due process. This earlier ruling underscored the judiciary's commitment to fairness, even as it navigates politically charged cases.
The ball is now in President Ruto's court to issue a new gazette notice that complies with legal requirements. Once this is done, Chief Justice Martha Koome can administer the oath of office to the nominees, enabling them to begin their six-year terms. The IEBC will then face the daunting task of addressing pending electoral activities, including voter registration, boundary delimitation, and preparations for by-elections in constituencies such as Baringo, Banissa, Magarini, Ugunja, Malava, and Mbeere North.
The court's decision also highlights the judiciary's role as a guardian of constitutionalism in Kenya. By balancing the validation of the nomination process with the nullification of the unlawful gazette notice, the judges have reinforced the importance of adhering to legal procedures while ensuring that the electoral process moves forward.
The ruling marks a pivotal moment in Kenya's electoral journey. While it upholds the nominations of the IEBC chairperson and commissioners, it sends a clear message that executive actions must respect judicial orders. As the country awaits the regularization of these appointments, all eyes will be on the IEBC to deliver a transparent and credible electoral process in the lead-up to 2027. The decision underscores the delicate balance between political urgency and the rule of law, a balance that will shape Kenya's democratic future.