Youth Advocacy for Africa (YAA) & 7 others v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 17 others
The bottom line
#Court grants limited access to IEBC election tech and ballot boxes for 2022 presidential petition scrutiny.
What this practically means
#The Supreme Court ruled on requests to inspect election materials from the 2022 presidential election. It allowed access to specific IEBC technology documents, server data, and ballot boxes from selected polling stations, but rejected broad requests it called "fishing expeditions." The court emphasized that scrutiny must be specific, practical, and fit within tight constitutional deadlines for election disputes.
Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicants have made out a sufficient reason to warrant the grant of the orders for scrutiny and access to the information and documents sought.
Key legal issues
#What is the standard for granting orders for scrutiny and access to election materials and technology in a presidential election petition?
The court must be satisfied that there is a sufficient reason for the request, that it is not a fishing expedition, that it is pleaded with specificity, and that it is reasonable, practical, and helpful given the constitutional timelines.
The court relied on its precedent in Raila Amolo Odinga & another v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 2 others, Presidential Petition No 1 of 2017, which established that scrutiny requests must be for a sufficient reason and not a fishing exercise. The court also noted that due to the strict timelines for presidential election petitions, only practical and helpful orders should be made. The court applied this standard to each prayer, granting those that were specific and practical (e.g., access to the National Tallying Centre server, penetration test reports) and refusing those that were vague, unrealistic, or would cause delay (e.g., access to all KIEMS kits, production of third-party contracts).
Legal principles established
#- Scrutiny requests must be for a sufficient reason, not a fishing expedition for new evidence.
- Requests must be pleaded with specificity and not couched in general terms.
- Orders must be reasonable, practical, and helpful given the strict constitutional timelines.
- The court will balance transparency with security concerns when ordering access to election technology.
- Only specific polling stations, not entire counties, will be opened for inspection and recount.
Court orders
#- 1.The IEBC shall provide to the applicants copies of its technology system security policy comprising but not limited to password policy, password matrix, owners of system administration password(s), system users and levels of access, and workflow chats for identification, tallying, transmission, and posting of portals and any API’s that had been integrated and the list of human interface and controls for such intervention subject however to any security related issues thereof.
- 2.That IEBC be compelled to give the applicants supervised access to any server(s) at the National Tallying Centre for storing and transmitting voting information and which are forensically imaged to capture a copy of the Form 34C which is the total votes cast.
- 3.The IEBC shall provide the applicants with Certified copies of penetration tests conducted on the IEBC election Technology System prior to and during the 2022 General and Presidential Election including certified copies of a) all reports prepared pursuant to Regulation 10 of Election (Technology) Regulations, 2017 and b) certified copies of certificates by a professional(s) prepared pursuant to Regulation 10(2) of Election Technology) Regulations,2017.
- 4.IEBC is hereby directed to avail partnership agreements with its technical partners, list of users, trail, and admin access to provide clarity on the IEBC systems and their usage for review and verification, Subject however to any security related issues thereof.
- 5.That the ballot boxes for the following polling stations be opened for inspection, scrutiny and recount: Nandi Hills and Sinendeti Primary School in Nandi, Belgut, Kapsuser and Chepkutum Primary Schools in Kericho County; Jomvi, Mikindani and Ministry of Water Tanks Polling Stations in Mombasa County; Mvita, Majengo and Mvita Primary Schools in Mombasa County; Tinderet CONMO, in Nandi County; Jarok, Gathanji and Kiheo Primary School Polling in Nyandarua County;
- 6.That the error forms signed by the Chairperson of IEBC during the tally and verification exercise at the National Tallying Centre between 10th to 15th August 2022 be provided to the applicants.
- 7.That IEBC should provide certified copies of Forms 32A and 34C Book 2 used in the impugned election Subject to the applicants providing to the IEBC specific contested polling stations for compliance thereof.
- 8.That the above exercise shall be conducted within 48 hours of these orders ie from 2 pm on Tuesday, 30th August to 2 pm on Thursday, September 1, 2022.
- 9.Each Party shall be represented by two agents during the exercises above and they shall at times be under the supervision of the Registrar of the court and her staff. The Registrar shall file her report by 5 pm on September 1, 2022 and avail copies to all parties.
- 10.Any party is at liberty to submit on the report before conclusion of the hearing as shall be directed by the President of this court.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 19, 20, 22, 23(3), 35, 81, 86, 140, 159 and 258 of the Constitution; sections 39 and 44 of the Elections Act, 2022; sections 12, 23 & 26 of the Supreme Court Act, 2011; rule 17 and 18 of the Supreme Court (Presidential Election Petition) Rules 2017
- Consolidated with
- Presidential Election Petition No E003 of 2022, Presidential Election Petition No E005 of 2022
Relief refused
#Order for the IEBC to provide the complete unedited soft copy of the Voters register in excel format (Prayer 1 in E002 and Prayer 8 in E003).
The register is already in the public domain and no justification has been given for its provision in the context of the dispute.
Order for access to all KIEMS kits and servers for all Constituency Tallying Centers (Prayer 2 in E002).
The request is unrealistic given the short timelines for the hearing and determination of the petitions.
Orders for access to various technological aspects of the election (Prayers 4,5,6,7,8,10 in E002; Prayer 2 in E003; Prayers 1 and 2 in E005).
The orders sought are not practicable, reasonable and helpful to ensure a just and fair determination of the petitions, and are couched in general terms and are vague.
Order for the terms of reference between Smartmatic International and Local Service Providers (Prayer 1 in E005).
The court cannot blindly grant orders to direct the production of contracts with terms of reference between third parties who are not parties to the petitions.
Order for the filing of further affidavits arising from the scrutiny exercise (Prayer 6 in E005).
Such an order would delay the proceedings and occasion prejudice to the respondents who will not be able to respond.
Costs
There shall be no order as to costs.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
the request for scrutiny must be made for a sufficient reason and that any prayer that would in effect be a fishing exercise to procure fresh evidence not already contained in the petition must be rejected.
any prayer couched in general terms, not pleaded with specificity or such request is impracticable in terms of scope and time will also be declined.
because of the narrow timelines granted by the Constitution to hear and determine a presidential election dispute, only reasonable, practical and helpful orders should be issued in that regard.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Drafting specific scrutiny prayers
When seeking election scrutiny, plead with precision. Identify specific polling stations, documents, or technology components. Avoid broad requests for 'all KIEMS kits' or 'all servers'—the court will reject these as fishing expeditions. Frame requests as reasonable and achievable within the 14-day constitutional timeline.
Election tech vendors: prepare for audits
If you provide election technology to IEBC, expect court-ordered disclosure of security policies, penetration test reports, and partnership agreements. Ensure your contracts and system documentation are audit-ready. The court may grant supervised access to servers, so maintain clear access logs and user hierarchies.
Your right to challenge election results
You can request scrutiny of election materials, but you must have a specific reason—not just suspicion. The court will not allow you to go on a 'fishing expedition' to find evidence. If you believe irregularities occurred at your polling station, name it specifically in your petition to have a better chance of getting access.
Frequently asked questions
#What is the standard for getting election materials inspected in Kenya?+
You must show a sufficient reason for the request, plead it with specificity, and ensure it is practical within the constitutional timelines. The court will reject vague or overly broad requests as 'fishing expeditions'.
Can I access IEBC's election technology systems in Kenya?+
Yes, but only if the court orders it. In this case, the court granted supervised access to the National Tallying Centre server and ordered IEBC to provide its security policy, penetration test reports, and partnership agreements, subject to security concerns.
What happens if IEBC does not comply with court orders in Kenya?+
The court can compel compliance through its orders. Here, IEBC was directed to provide documents and access within 48 hours, with the Registrar supervising and reporting back. Non-compliance could lead to contempt proceedings.
Can I request a recount of all ballot boxes in Kenya?+
No. The court will only order inspection, scrutiny, and recount of specific polling stations you identify in your petition. General requests for all ballot boxes in a county will be declined as impractical.
Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Youth Advocacy for Africa (YAA) & 7 others v Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission & 17 others", Case Analysis (2022). Election Petition E002, E003 & E005 of 2022 (Consolidated). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.orghttps://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kesc/2022/42/eng@2022-08-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.