The High Court has consolidated the case challenging the procurement of the Kenya Integrated Electoral Management System (Kiems) and the one on printing ballot papers tenders and set a hearing for February 1 next year.
Petitioners Stephen Mirambo and Boaz Akuru moved to court seeking consolidation of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) tenders in preparation for the 2022 elections.
Justice James Makau gave the interested parties 14 days to respond.
READ MORE
ODM reads malice in IEBC stalemate
MP Mutuse blames Kalonzo for delay in naming IEBC chiefs
Court ruling does not affect current IEBC selection panel: Parliament
What the church must do to regain its moral compass and win hearts
Kiems kits and the ballot papers are two integral components of the election and delay in procuring them could affect the integrity of the August 9, 2022 polls.
Kiems kit tender includes the supply, delivery, installation, testing, commissioning, support, and maintenance of software and hardware equipment and accessories for the running of the election and the winner of the tender would need time to procure the same and ensure no gaps that could compromise the polls.
In 2017, challenges in the transmission of results led to the nullification of the presidential election.
A number of firms are challenging the awarding of the tender to supply Kiems kits to Dutch firm Smartmatic and the ballot printing tender awarded to a Greek firm - Inform P Lykos Holdings.
Already, the tender to print ballot papers for the August 9, 2022, General Election is being fought at the Court of Appeal by disgruntled suppliers.
Inform P Lykos Holdings had been picked from a pool of 12 firms that bid for the supply of ballot papers.
The three-year open international tender would also see the firm provide election results declaration forms to be used at the constituency, county, and the national tallying centre.
Risk Africa Innovatis Limited is challenging the award of the Kiems tender to Smartmatic arguing that the data migration was not budgeted for at the time the tender was floated.
The firm claims the procurement was not done by a fully constituted commission.