[President Uhuru Kenyatta in a past event. Harun Mwau’s petition raises serious constitutional questions. Photo/Nation]

Do you have a lead on a newsworthy story? Share news tips with us here at Hivisasa!

Interpretation of the term fresh election in compliance with article 138(1) will dominate in a Supreme Court petition filed by former Kilome MP Harun Mwau.

The billionaire businessman is among three Kenyans who have challenged Uhuru’s victory, a petition that if it goes through will throw Uhuru into a limbo following nullification of his victory two months ago.

In his prayers, Mwau wants the court nullify Uhuru’s victory in the repeat poll on grounds that IEBC failed to conduct elections in ‘strict conformity’ with the constitution.

Fundamentally, Mwau contends that nominations were not conducted prior to the elections pursuant to various elections laws adding that IEBC ‘blatantly’ violated the constitution.

Also, Mwau seeks explanation on why a minor candidate, Cyrus Jirongo, was included in the presidential ballot paper despite being declared bankrupt by the High Court.

During the 2013 presidential petition between Raila Odinga and Uhuru Kenyatta, the court ruled that only petitioner(s) and President-elect should participate in a repeat poll in the event of nullification.

And despite IEBC gazetting two, it later on included names of other candidates following a court challenge, a move that has further caused confusion.

With the Supreme Court reasoned judgment of 20017 having called for fresh elections which demands fresh nominations, the issue will form gist of both the petitioners and respondents.

Further, Mwau seeks to know why IEBC included Raila Odinga’s name on the ballot despite having withdrawn from the race.

Supreme Court will hear and determine the fate of Uhuru in the next 14 days and its decision shall be final.