REPUBLIC OF KENYA - The Judiciary

the litigants (present or prospective), could fully grasp
the reasons behind its refusal to exercise jurisdiction as
purportedly provided under Section 14 of the Supreme
Court Act. The promise of justice embedded in Section 14,
was undoubtedly an issue close to the hearts of the
Kenyan people; and this, thus, provided an opportunity
for the Supreme Court to seek the parties’ participation
by way of detailed submissions, as a basis for full justice
on the issue. This would especially have been advisable,
in view of the well-established presumption, of the
constitutionality of a statute, and of its provisions”
(emphases supplied).
[158] This very principle was well articulated by the apex Court of
Tanzania, the Court of Appeal, in an election petition where the
constitutionality of Section 111(2) of the Elections Act was under
consideration, in Ndyanabo v. Attorney-General (Civil Appeal No. 64
of 2001 [2002] TZCA 2 (14 February 2002) @ www.saflii.org. The Court,
in that case, gave directions on the interpretation of the Constitution,
as follows:
“Thirdly, until the contrary is proved, a legislation is
presumed to be constitutional (emphasis mine). It is a
89