Doris Petra: Grounds that cleared her path to December 7 elections after High Court ruling in Naivasha

©The Star

Doris Petra: Grounds that cleared her path to December 7 elections after High Court ruling in Naivasha

Festus Chuma 18:21 - 30.11.2024

Doris Petra and Nick Mwendwa have secured a major win as the High Court cleared their path to December 7 elections.

Smiles must have lit up the faces of Doris Petra and Nick Mwendwa on Friday after the High Court in Naivasha threw out a case that sought to bar their joint candidature in the upcoming Football Kenya Federation (FKF) presidential elections.

The December 7 polls now proceed with the duo on the ballot paving the way for a spirited contest.

Justice Grace Nzioka dismissed the suit filed by Luthers Mokua, who challenged the FKF Electoral Board’s decision to clear Petra and Mwendwa as candidates for the federation’s top leadership.

Mokua had alleged irregularities in their eligibility and cited inconsistencies between the FKF Constitution and Kenyan sports laws.

“No fault was found on provisions of all relevant laws and regulations,” explained Counsel Japheth Munyendo, who represented Petra and Mwendwa in the case was quoted by Citizen.

“The ex parte applicant failed to convince the honorable court that the joint candidature was inconsistent with the Sports Act, Sports Registrar’s Regulations of 2016, the FKF Constitution, the Constitution of Kenya, or any other enabling provisions of law.”

Court’s grounds for dismissal

The court ruled that Mokua’s prayers lacked merit or were improperly presented.

The first prayer, which sought to quash the FKF Electoral Board’s clearance of Petra and Mwendwa, was dismissed as unsubstantiated.

Justice Nzioka observed that the applicant had failed to demonstrate any legal breach in the board’s decision-making process.

The second prayer, requesting that Mwendwa be declared ineligible to vie for the vice presidency, was rejected as “normally futuristic.”

According to the court, such a claim could not apply to a process that had already commenced and was consistent with existing statutes.

Mokua’s third argument targeted Article 43(3) of the FKF Constitution, asserting it was inconsistent with Section 46(5) of the Sports Act.

However, the court dismissed this claim, highlighting the applicant’s failure to exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms stipulated in the FKF Constitution.

Article 37(f) of the FKF Constitution, which allows National Executive Committee (NEC) members to serve two terms in a position and vie for different roles afterward, also came under scrutiny.

However, the court upheld the article, stating that it aligns with principles of democratic elections.

Legal costs and reactions

In a final blow to Mokua, the court ordered him to cover the costs incurred by the respondents in defending the case.

This decision further reinforced the court’s stance on the legality of Petra and Mwendwa’s candidacy.

Petra expressed elation following the ruling, framing the decision as a vindication of her team’s focus and integrity.

“We are happy that justice has prevailed. This case was supposed to distract us, but we stayed put and continued engaging the delegates because we knew what to focus on,” she said.

“We are now energized more than ever heading to the December 7 elections. We are confident of winning so that we can concentrate on building the beautiful game.”

The bigger picture

With the FKF presidential elections drawing closer, the dismissal of the case clears a critical hurdle for Petra and Mwendwa.

They are among nine candidates vying for the top seat, including prominent names like Tom Alila, Chris Amimo, Hussein Mohammed, and Barry Otieno.

The race promises to shape the future of Kenyan football, with stakeholders keenly watching how the leadership transition unfolds.

The ruling also provides a broader perspective on the judiciary’s interpretation of sports governance, highlighting the importance of adhering to both constitutional and statutory provisions.

Tags: