President William Ruto has once again come under fire for disregarding a court order, this time by appointing a new chairperson and six commissioners to the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), even as a legal challenge over the process remains unresolved.
In a Kenya Gazette notice dated June 10, 2025, Ruto named Erastus Edung Ethekon as the IEBC Chairperson for a six-year term, alongside commissioners Ann Njeri Nderitu, Moses Alutalala Mukhwana, Mary Karen Sorobit, Hassan Noor Hassan, Francis Odhiambo Aduol, and Fahima Arafat Abdallah. The appointments, the President said, were made under constitutional authority granted by Article 250(2) and the IEBC Act.
However, the appointments directly contradict conservatory orders issued by the High Court on May 19, which barred the National Assembly from vetting or approving the nominees until a petition challenging the process is heard and determined. The petition, brought forward by two citizens, argues that the selection process was flawed and that some nominees failed to meet the legal threshold for appointment.
This act of defiance has raised renewed concerns over executive interference with judicial independence. Analysts fear it may trigger another round of friction between the Judiciary and the Executive — tensions that had momentarily cooled after a high-profile meeting between President Ruto and Chief Justice Martha Koome in January 2024, following his earlier dismissive stance on court rulings he deemed politically motivated.
Ruto’s latest move also rekindles memories of past confrontations between Kenyan presidents and the Judiciary. In 2020, then-Chief Justice David Maraga publicly accused former President Uhuru Kenyatta of persistently ignoring court orders, calling the behavior “a mockery of the rule of law.” Maraga’s words, widely regarded as bold, now echo in the present moment, where a new electoral body is formed under similar clouds of constitutional defiance.
Supporters of the appointments argue that the IEBC, which has operated without a full commission since early 2023, urgently needs reconstitution to resume its electoral mandate. Yet legal experts caution that the rule of law must not be sacrificed for expediency. “The law is clear,” said one constitutional scholar. “Due process must be followed, especially in appointments that touch on the integrity of elections.”
Despite the court’s pending ruling, the seven appointees await swearing-in, an act that may further deepen the standoff between Kenya’s three arms of government and test the resilience of the country’s constitutional order.
As the country inches closer to future electoral cycles, the question remains: can Kenya achieve both functional institutions and a genuine respect for the rule of law, or must it choose between them?
Written By Rodney Mbua
