Kenya Kwanza Alliance presidential hopeful William Ruto and his running mate Rigathi Gachagua have moved to court and filed a preliminary objection to a petition by eleven petitioners who moved to the Supreme Court seeking conservatory orders to bar them from being sworn into office.


Ruto and Gachagua, through their lawyer Elias Mutuma claimed the case before the Supreme Court was an abuse of the court process and its jurisdiction has been prematurely and wrongly invoked.

The duo also claimed the case offends the doctrine of exhaustion regarding the avenues of possible course of action available on the Rules of Procedure on Settlement of Disputes.

They also argued the case does not merit the test of justiciability and ripeness since the petitioners are seeking the court’s intervention in a speculative venture, which is akin to wasting time.

Read More

  1. What the Public Private Partnerships Act says about Ruto’s cancellation of Adani deals
  2. Ruto unveils Taifa Care under SHA to advance UHC, to settle hospital debts
  3. All macroeconomic indicators point to a positive turnaround - President Ruto

Ruto and Gachagua opined the suit was incompetent and defective both in form and substance.

"The suit herein is incompetent and incurably defective both in form and in substance and is therefore untenable," the petition read.


The eleven petitioners through their lawyer Kibe Mungai argued swearing in Ruto and Gachagua into office would be a violation of the Constitution since they do not pass the integrity test as enshrined in Chapter 6 of the Kenyan Constitution.

“That pending hearing and determination of this Petition, the honourable Court be pleased to issue an order conservatory injunction to restrain the first and second respondents from being sworn into offices of President and Deputy President respectively in the event that they get elected during the General Election scheduled for August 9, 2022,” the petition reads in part.

“The Petition herein seeks to safeguard and enforce the principles, values and objectives of the constitution, including chapter six thereof and its application to the eligibility of candidates for President and Deputy President.”


The petitioners pointed out that if the court does not hear and determine the constitutionality of the registration and the gazettement of Ruto and Gachagua before they were sworn into office, it would amount to aiding and abetting illegalities.

“Unless the court hears and determines the constitutionality of the registration and gazettement of the 1st and 2nd Respondents as candidates, it amounts to aiding and abetting illegalities if they are sworn into their respective offices in the event they get elected,” reads part of the petition.