Al-Ghurair to print presidential ballot papers, appeal court rules

0
743
From L to R:NASA principals Musalia Mudavadi, Raila Odinga, Isaac Rutto, Kalonzo Musyoka and Moses Wetang'ula,

The Court of Appeal has allowed Al-Ghurair printing and publishing to print the presidential ballot papers for the August General Elections.

The appellate court overturned a high court judgment stopping Al-Ghurair from printing the presidential ballot papers.

While delivering the judgment, the five-judge bench ruled that the High Court erred in holding public participation as a mandatory requirement for direct procurement.

The judges ruled that public participation is not a requirement in direct procurement, which was applied by the electoral commission in awarding the contract to Al Ghurair.

The bench also faulted the High Court for failing to consider that there was no time to award another tender.

The court had earlier upheld High Court determination that newspaper cuttings are insufficient proof that President Uhuru Kenyatta met Al Ghurair officials and influenced the awarding of tender.

The matter was heard and determined by Justices Erastus Githinji, Roselyn Nambuye, Visram Alnasir, Jamilla Muhammed and Otieno Odek.

High Court Application

NASA moved to the High Court last month seeking to quash the decision by IEBC made on May 29th 2017 to award the tender for the printing of ballot papers for the presidential elections scheduled forĀ August 8th.

The opposition was also seeking an order compelling IEBC to reconsider and award afresh the tender for the printing of elections materials for the presidential elections and in doing so take into account the views of the relevant stakeholders in the said elections audits decision.

They further wanted the court to prohibit IEBC from considering and or awarding the tender and contract to the Al-Ghurair printing and publishing company and or its affiliate for the printing of election materials for the August elections.

NASA argued that the decision to award the tender to the said company was predetermined, in bad faith and in contravention of the constitutional precept of transparency and accountability.