Court lifts gag order on Uhuru, Ruto presidency bid

By Judy Ogutu

The High Court has set aside orders barring debate on whether Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto can vie for presidency.

High Court Judge Isaac Lenaola vacated the orders on Friday after the parties in the case entered consent to that effect.

"Clause 4 of the orders issued by consent on February 2, 2012 are vacated by consent of all parties present and any party may raise the matter for substantive argument if they so wish," the judge ruled.

In the case before court, three individuals, Patrick Njuguna, Augustino Netto, Charles Omanga, Kenya Youth Parliament and Kenya Youth League have moved to court to bar the two from contesting for presidency.

The High Court in Nairobi on Friday lifted gag order barring discussion of whether ICC accused Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto are eligible to run for Presidency [Photo: File/Standard]

Already, 213 Internally Displaced Persons, International Centre for Policy and Conflict, Kanu and several individuals have joined the suit as interested parties. Dr Stephen Njiru is an amicus curie (friend of the court).

They have named the Attorney General (AG), Ruto, Uhuru and the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) as respondents to the suit.

Through their advocate, Mr Anthony Oluoch, the petitioners contend that allowing Uhuru and Ruto to run for public office would also amount to perpetuating a culture of impunity.

The petitioners are seeking orders to bar IEBC from accepting nomination or election of any candidate accused of committing serious offences under the International law or Kenyan law until they are cleared.

They also want the court to declare that allowing the two to vie for presidency is a threat to the Constitution and a recipe for chaos.

Further, they want the court to determine whether presumption of innocence in favour of Uhuru and Ruto the overrides public interest to ensure protection and upholding the principles of the Constitution.

They also want the court to declare that presumption of innocence of the two does not override public interest. The case will be heard on March 7.