Former MP Nick Salat (pictured) has accused Supreme Court judges of using his petition challenging Bomet Senator Wilfred Lesan's election to settle scores with the Judicial Service Commission.
Mr Salat had contested for the senatorial seat but lost to Mr Lesan in 2013, thus sparking a two-year battle that ended up in the Supreme Court.
The former legislator is now faced with a Sh68 million court bill slapped on him after losing the case in the High Court and Court of Appeal.
However, the bill might rise as justices Willy Mutunga, Kalpana Rawal, Njoki Ndung'u, Jackton Ojwang' and Phillip Tunoi ordered that he bears the cost of the case he brought before them.
The former MP through his lawyer Titus Koceyo told The Standard he felt that he did not find justice after his case was turned into a side show.
The judges in the highest court in the land turned the case into one bashing JSC for ordering that judges who had clocked 70 years should stay away from court.
"My client raised strong legal issues to be determined by the Supreme Court but it ended up being a side show. His case suffered because of this," said Mr Koceyo.
Legitimate winner
In the case, the former legislator had asked the court to order the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to scrutinise all votes cast in the senatorial election in Bomet County.
Further, he was seeking to have the court declare that Lesan was not duly elected as the senator and that he be disqualified from participating for any elections for a period of five years.
Salat's other prayer, which was also dismissed, was that the Isaac Hassan-led commission be compelled to issue him with a certificate indicating that he was the legitimate winner.
The Supreme Court unanimously found there was no flaw in the lower courts' decisions dismissing Salat's case. They then discussed a letter that was written by Koceyo to the Chief Justice and Registrar of the Supreme Court over alleged delay due to JSC's decision to lock out of court judges aged over 70 years.
"We find no flaw in the Appellate Court's majority decision, which rightly in law upheld the trial judge's exercise of discretion in relation to the application for scrutiny and recount. This appeal therefore fails," the judges unanimously ruled.
Koceyo stated that the letter he wrote ought not to have been addressed as it was not part of the case.
Justices Rawal, Tunoi, Njoki and Ojwang' noted that the letter by the lawyer was a matter of judicial notice that ought to be addressed by that court.
Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter
But Salat said the letter was not the focus of his case, which instead was an election petition that he felt was not properly addressed.