Here below is the ruling that Chief Justice David Kenani Maraga delivered that could sent Wajir governor packing although he was saved by Njoki Ndungu and Jackton Ojwang
Pre-Election Disputes that Question one’s Qualification or Eligibility to Vie in an Election Challenge the Integrity and or Validity of the Election and therefore go to the Root of the Election and can be Entertained by the Election Courts
“ In my view, a contextual interpretation of Article 88(4)(e) divides into two categories the pre-election nomination disputes therein referred to. The first category comprises of the disputes which are founded under the general rubric of the constitutional qualification or eligibility criteria to contest in an election as set out in Article 99 for Member of Parliament; Article 137 for President; and Article 193 for member of the County Assembly.
 The second category includes intra-party nomination disputes contemplated by Section 31 of the Elections Act such as whether or not one was properly selected under the “rules of the political party concerned relating to members of that party who wish to contest” in a given election which the PPDT may or may not have resolved under Section 41 of the Political Parties Act; and disputes under Section 34 of the Elections Act as to whether one’s name should or should not be on a political party list. This category of disputes are not founded on any constitutional criteria and do not therefore go to the root of an election. In my view, IEBC has exclusive jurisdiction to determine this category of disputes. It should therefore determine them with finality subject to any appeals in accordance with the procedure set out in the Elections Act and the election courts should not entertain them.
 In my humble view, however, an exception has to be made with regard to the first category of disputes which are founded on the constitutional qualification or eligibility criteria for several reasons.
 First, as I have already found, the issue of one’s academic qualification to contest a gubernatorial seat is a requirement expressly stated in Section 22(1)(b)(ii) of the Elections Act but anchored in the Constitution. Article 180(2) of the Constitution provides that “[t]o be eligible for election as a County Governor, a person must be eligible for election as a member of the county assembly” (MCA). As regards the eligibility for election as an MCA, Article 193(1)(b) of the Constitution provides that an aspiring candidate must satisfy, inter alia, “any educational, moral and ethical requirements prescribed by… [the] constitution or an Act of Parliament….” That is why, in my view, at paragraph 231 of its Judgment in John Harun Mwau & 2 Others v. IEBC & 2 Others, Consolidated Petitions No. 2 & 4 of 2017;  eKLR, this Court observed that the nomination process is deeply rooted in the Constitution.
 Pursuant to this provision, Parliament enacted the Elections Act, Section 22(1)(b)(ii) of which prescribes a university degree as the prerequisite minimum academic qualification for one to contest as an MCA. It reads:
“a person may be nominated as a candidate for an election under this Act only if that person …holds, in the case of a Member of Parliament … or … member of county assembly, a degree from a university recognized in Kenya.”
 Any disputes that questions one’s qualification or eligibility to vie in an election is invariably a challenge of the integrity or validity of that election. Needless to say that such dispute goes to the root of an election. As such, even though Article 88(4)(e) vests IEBC with jurisdiction to handle this category of disputes, a purposive reading of other provisions of the Constitution would show that the election courts are also vested with jurisdiction to entertain them.”
DISSENTING OPINION of Justice D.K. Maraga, CJ & P of the Supreme Court of Kenya in HON. MOHAMED ABDI MAHAMUD vs. AHMED ABDULLAHI MOHAMAD & 3 OTHERS (Petition No. 7 of 2018).