Martha Karua moves to the East African Court
Azimio la Umoja deputy presidential candidate Martha Karua has moved to the East African Court of Justice to challenge the Supreme Court judgment on August 9th polls.
In her application alongside Director at Muslims for Human Rights (Muhuri) Khelef Khalifa, Karua is seeking an alternative opinion on the grievances she raised.
In a post, Karua, who has been discontented by the Supreme Court and Kenya’s Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), affirmed the move.
“@MarthaKarua & @khalifa_khelef have filed a Reference at the East Africa Court of Justice challenging the actions and decisions of Kenya’s Supreme Court and @IEBCKenya in the 2022 elections.”
@MarthaKarua & @khalifa_khelef have filed a Reference at the East Africa Court of Justice challenging the actions and decisions of Kenya's Supreme Court and @IEBCKenya in the 2022 elections pic.twitter.com/hmoDstizoi
— Kwamchetsi Makokha (@kwamchetsi) November 4, 2022
After IEBC boss Wafula Chebukati announced Dr. William Ruto as the President-Elect, Karua and Raila Odinga moved to court to challenge the results.
However, the Supreme Court upheld Ruto’s win, with Chief Justice Martha Koome citing that the petitioners lacked sufficient evidence.
Referring to some of the proofs as ‘hot air’, Karua would then shoot back and refer to the apex court’s full judgment.
Mr. Odinga has since consistently blamed both the IEBC, the Supreme Court, and foreign forces whom he did not for robbing his victory.
A couple of days ago, Karua insisted that only the law recognized her as the President and not herself.
In an interview with Spice FM, Karua said that she respected the court verdict but disagreed with it because justice given in court might not represent the truth.
“The law recognises him and I don’t. He’s the president courtesy of the law. I do not have to over-praise that position. I said I respect the court verdict but totally disagree with it.”
According to Karua, the August 9 presidential election results were manipulated, saying that is what she believes and she can’t be forced to believe otherwise.
“I still stand here to say that the results were doctored and that’s a personal position. You cannot stop my brain from working, you cannot force me to believe. My belief is not subject to the law. It is subject to my conscience but giving way to the law is obeying the law.”
“The court spoke, we gave way and we are still searching for the truth. So I keep on having to say I do not believe he won.”
Also, read our top stories today: