My fellow lawyers, The recent rulling by the Court of Appeal on the independent candidate has left more to be desired. If you read the rulling and interprete the law you will realise that a bench of 7 justices of Appeal could have decided the matter per incurium. Here is what the court decided in page 4 of the rulling: However, for the avoidance of doubt we wish to refresh the memories of the learned Deputy Attorney General and his team that an appeal does not operate an automatic stay. So, the law as it is at the moment and onward to the General Elections in October, is what the High Court has decided, that is, independent candidates are allowed. But if you read the Basic Duites and enforcement Act the law on which Mtikila used to file his petition the it reads in Section 14(3): Notwithstanding the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code or of any other law to the contrary, where in proceedings under this Act which do not involve continuous breach or personal injuries, the Government files a notice of intention to appeal against any decision of a court, the notice shall, when entered, operate as a stay of execution upon the decision sought to be appealed against. My question is: How can our highest court make such a blatant mistake? MY REQUEST: LETS DEBATE THIS AND FINDER THE RATIO DECIDENDI OF THE RULING.