Attorney General, Paul Kihara Kariuki, will not be opposing any of the eight presidential petitions seeking to nullify Deputy President William Ruto's August 9 presidential election win.
Kihara - in what is seen as history in the country's political landscape - did not take the route traversed by his predecessor who opposed the petitions in both the 2013 and 2017 elections.
Solicitor General, Kennedy Ogeto, who spoke on behalf of the Attorney General, affirmed the move in a response to one of the presidential petitions filed by Busia Senator-elect, Okiya Omtatah, in which the AG was listed as the 9th respondent.
"Take notice that the Hon. Attorney General, the 9th respondent herein, pursuant to Rule 11(2) of Supreme Court Presidential Election Rules, 2017 which requires a party to indicate whether they intend to oppose the petition, hereby signifies to the honourable court that he does not intend to oppose the petition,” Ogeto stated in the notice.
The Solicitor General, however, stated that the AG would oppose the petition filed by former Gatundu South Member of Parliament, Moses Kuria.
In the petition, Kuria wants the highest court in the country to dismiss the election petition filed by Azimio's Raila Odinga and his running mate Martha Karua, challenging the results of the August 9 presidential poll.
Kuria also wants the Supreme Court not to declare Raila Odinga the winner of the August 9 presidential vote.
According to Ogeto, Kariuki would oppose the Supreme Court's authority to hear and determine Kuria's petition.
Kariuki's stance not to oppose the presidential petitions is a different take from the former Attorney General, Githu Muigai, who opposed such petitions.
In both the 2013 and 2017 presidential polls, Githu opposed two petitions that sought to nullify the presidential election that declared incumbent President Uhuru Kenyatta as the winner.
Kariuki's options remain open as his choice of not opposing the petitions doesn't automatically mean that he is in support of the election nullifications.
According to the Constitution, the AG can still have a neutral voice in court and only seek to offer legal opinions that could aid in the ultimate judgment of the Supreme Court.
The 7-Judge bench of the Supreme Court is set to deliver its judgment by Monday, September 5.
