A company’s bid to challenge the electoral commission’s ballot-paper tender has flopped after the High Court found that it filed its case five days after a three-day deadline set by the judge.
Oilmax Ventures sought to overturn the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board’s (PPARB) decision upholding the commission’s tender requirements on ballot-printing experience and the Sh10 billion cash-flow requirement.
The company was granted permission to file the substantive case within three days, while the court directed that the case be handled urgently because procurement disputes have strict timelines.
The company filed the substantive court documents on September 15, five days after the deadline had expired, prompting the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to ask the court to close the file.
The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) Chairperson Erastus Edung Ethekon (center, podium) briefs the media on April 30, 2026, on the completion of the Enhanced Continuous Voter Registration (ECVR). With him are fellow IEBC Commissioners.
Photo credit: Francis Nderitu| Nation Media Group
Justice William Musyoka dismissed Oilmax’s attempt to revive the case, saying the company had not given an explanation for missing the deadline.
The court said procurement judicial reviews must be completed within 45 days. “Time is of the essence in judicial review proceedings in public procurement matters,” Justice Musyoka said.
“Strict timelines had been given for filing the motion, to facilitate the handling of the matter within the 45 days provided for under the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act. Those strict timelines would demand that the parties be as diligent as possible, for any slip could have disastrous consequences,” he added.
The court rejected Oilmax’s explanation that the Judiciary’s online Case Tracking System (CTS) had failed when the documents were allegedly uploaded on September 10.
The judge noted that another party had successfully filed a document through the system that day. He questioned why Oilmax took five days to discover that its papers had not been uploaded.
“If, indeed, there were challenges with the CTS, a prudent party would have kept monitoring it to ensure that all was well in the matter,” the court said, ending the dispute at the procedural step.
Oilmax had also sought reinstatement of the case and enlargement of time, blaming the delay on its lawyer and electronic filing problems.
The court rejected the request, saying Oilmax had filed the case five days after the three days granted by the judge had expired, making the filing invalid and incompetent. “A motion, filed after the lapse of the leave, is as dead as a dodo,” the court said.
“I find it curious that the ex-parte only thought of seeking enlargement of time after the incompetent motion was struck out. That would suggest that the application for enlargement of time was an afterthought,” said the judge.
Oilmax’s complaints concerned the validity of the IEBC’s tender requirements. It challenged the requirement for bidders to have successfully completed at least two security-ballot printing contracts, including one involving at least 150 million ballot papers within the previous five years.
It also challenged the requirement for an average annual supply turnover of at least Sh6 billion in 2023, 2024 and 2025; and the requirement to demonstrate access to liquid assets, unencumbered real assets, credit lines or other financial means sufficient to meet a Sh10 billion supply cash-flow requirement, independent of any contractual advance payment.
The tender, advertised on August 11, covers ballot papers, tactile folders, the Register of Voters and statutory election result declaration forms.
Oilmax argued that the requirements were restrictive and difficult to reconcile with the tender’s 40 per cent local-content requirement. It asked the court to quash the PPARB decision and stop IEBC from proceeding under the disputed criteria.
The board rejected those arguments on September 3, 2026, triggering the court action. It said Oilmax had not proved that the requirements were unlawful, discriminatory, disproportionate or anti-competitive.
The board said IEBC had projected about 168 million ballot papers. It found the 150 million experience threshold was linked to the scale of the procurement and upheld the financial thresholds.
The board found an inconsistency in the tender over acceptable forms of tender security. It ordered IEBC to clarify or amend the document and extended the submission deadline.
