Lang'ata Member of Parliament Nixon Korir was allowed by a Nairobi court to auction assets owned by two voters who had challenged his election.
Justice Weldon Korir ruled that the two voters Oscar Ocholla Omoke and Kiragu Margery Nduta pay Ksh 2.1 million which amounted to the cost of the suit.
The duo and three others; Mercy Khasiani Cheyumba, Henry King Kiragu and Esther Wairimu Kiragu had challenged the Lang'ata legislator's win.
The five petitioners moved to court at the start of 2020 after Korir served them with proclamation notices, in which he sought to attach their household items and motor vehicles.
Omoke and Nduta had however presented an application of apportionment to the court seeking to have the Ksh 2,117,566 fine split between the five as they had all challenged Korir's election.
They asked that the court allow them to pay Ksh445,478 each, all in monthly installments until their entire sum is paid in full.
Justice Korir dismissed their application stating that their petition to have the fine apportioned between five people was not supported by any known law.
"The judgements of the Election Court and the Court of Appeal are clear that the costs were awarded to the respondents against the petitioners. In such a case, the costs have to be met by the petitioners jointly and severally. The respondents can execute for the entire costs against any of the petitioners," Justice Korir ruled.
Justice Korir further stated that Omoke and Nduta had failed to serve an application on the other three, therefore, an apportionment of the money to them would have been prejudicial since they were not heard.
The five petitioners, upon losing their case also owed the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) and its returning officer Martin Simotwo a separate decretal sum amounting to Ksh2,227,390.
Korir's win was upheld by the court on February 27, 2018 after ruling that Omoke and his colleagues had failed to provide substantial evidence that would warrant the court to nullify his win.
“The petitioner failed to prove his allegations of election irregularities ranging from intimidation of his agents, misuse of public resources and alterations in forms 35A,” the court had ruled.
