The National Assembly has moved to the High Court seeking the dismissal of a petition aimed at stopping the scheduled vetting of nominees to the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).
The vetting, which was to be conducted by the House Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs beginning May 27, was temporarily halted by the court following a petition filed by activists Kelvin Roy Omondi and Boniface Mwangi.
The court issued conservatory orders barring the vetting process until at least May 29, pending further deliberations.
In its response, the National Assembly argues that the petition is speculative and fails to meet the legal threshold for court intervention, citing the “doctrine of ripeness.”
“The petition challenges an ongoing constitutional process in respect of which no decision or action has been taken by the National Assembly,” the House stated in its affidavit. “It deals with anticipatory circumstances rather than actual or probable events.”
The House also contends that the petitioners have not exhausted alternative constitutional and procedural avenues, including raising objections directly before Parliament. As such, the case is deemed “premature” and in violation of the doctrine of exhaustion.
According to parliamentary procedure, once the President submits names for the IEBC Chairperson and Commissioners, the Speaker relays the message to the House and forwards the list to the Justice and Legal Affairs Committee. The committee then conducts public hearings and submits a report for debate and approval on the House floor.
The Assembly emphasized that this vetting process is a constitutional duty that ensures transparency, public participation, and checks and balances among state institutions.
“The Constitution grants the National Assembly a general confirmatory mandate to approve appointments to constitutional commissions and independent offices,” the affidavit adds. “This is a key mechanism in constitutional democracies.”
The Assembly further noted that halting the process would be contrary to public interest, especially since the public had already submitted memoranda expecting their views to be considered during the vetting.
