The High Court has declined to suspend orders allowing the 47 county assemblies to debate the Punguza Mizigo Bill.
Justice John Mativo said that the court will have interfered with the constitutional timeline if it stopped the debate.
On August 13, the judge lifted earlier orders that had stopped the debate. He said he dismissed the application filed by David Ngari and International Economic Law Centre because the petitioners were not in court to prosecute the case.
But hours later, Ngari and IELC filed a fresh application seeking to have the orders stopping the debate reinstated.
Their lawyers Gilbert Nyamweya and James Mamboleo claimed they were in a different courtroom when the judge dismissed their application for non-attendance.
"Our absence from the proceedings in which the application was dismissed was occasioned by the erroneous cause listing of the matter before Justice Pauline Nyamweya instead of Justice John Mativo. We were actually present but in a different court room," read their documents.
Ngari had argued the Bill was procured through deceit and illegalities since the signatures, which had been verified by IEBC, are not genuine.
He argued that the uniformity of the signatures raised the question of authenticity and reliability of the signed forms. It was impossible to verify the signatures because the electoral body did not have a repository of specimen signatures for comparison.
But Thirdway Alliance party leader Ekuru Aukot said those opposing the Punguza Mizigo Bill ought to have waited for its enactment by the county assemblies and then challenge it in court.
