Court suspends decision that found Mumma with contempt of court

The High court has suspended the decision of Political Parties Dispute Tribunal which found ODM party Chairperson for national elections board Catherine Mumma with contempt of court.

Mumma was found with contempt of court for disobeying orders issued on May 14 to recognise Umoja II MCA Joseph Ndonji as the ODM nominee.

However High Court Judge Joseph Sergon suspended the said ruling pending the hearing of the appeal.

"That there be a temporary order for stay of execution of the ruling of the Tribunal delivered on June 14 to last until June 30", the judge ordered. 

Justice Sergon further ordered that there be a stay of the proceedings scheduled for Thursday evening to last until June 30.

The Tribunal had found Mumma in contempt of the orders issued on May 31 which directed the party to issue a nomination certificate of Umoja II ward MCA to incumbent Ndonji. 

The Tribunal had also nullified the certificate issued to former Umoiner tout Shadrack Machanje which the party had issued to him. 

Mumma was expected to appear before the Tribunal on Thursday to show cause why she should not jailed for six years . 

However through lawyer Prof. Tom Ojienda,he appealed the PPDT ruling stating that it erred by failing to appreciate that it was only the IEBC which had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint regarding the fresh nomination exercise that took place on May 31.

Ojienda argues that the Tribunal erred by assuming jurisdiction to hear and determine the Application dated June 6, 2022 and failed to appreciate that it was a fresh nomination dispute that ought to have been subjected to the ODM’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms in the first instance in violation of Section 40(2) of the Political Parties Act;

"The Tribunal erred by assuming jurisdiction to hear and determine the Application when ODM Party had already forwarded the name of Machanje to the Independent, Electoral and Boundaries Commission, and as such any dispute revolving around the said nomination was a preserve of the IEBC Dispute Resolution Committee as per Article 88 (4)(e) of the Constitution and Section 74(1) of the Elections Act", he states.

He faulted the Tribunal for purporting to determine that it had concurrent jurisdiction with the IEBC and in so doing usurped the exclusive jurisdiction conferred upon the Commission to determine nomination disputes after names are submitted to it in violation of Article 88 (4)(e) of the Constitution and Section 74(1) of the Elections Act.