The basic doctrine structure of the constitution formed the core of ruling on the appeal against the High Court ruling nullifying the building bridges initiative bill. Five of the court of the appeal judges were in agreement with the high court that the Kenyan constitution had a foundation that could any be altered by the constituent power. Justices Fatuma Sichale and Roslyne Nambuye were of the view that the constitution was a living document and Kenyans hands should not be tied on how to change it.
Justices Daniel Musinga, Patrick Kiage, Francis Tuiyyot, and Kairu Gatembu and Hannah Okwengu affirmed the high court decision on the basic structure doctrine and that its part of jurisprudence and is not an alien concept as some had submitted contrary to justice Sichale who differed from the high court ruling on the IEBC quorum issue.Justice Tuiyyot, Gatembu, Kiage, Hannah Okwengu upheld the high court ruling that IEBC was had no quorum to undertake such a matter of verifying BBI signatures.
The Judges also upheld the High Court ruling that the President can be sued in his personal capacity for anything done or not done in that capacity. They said the president was acting in his official capacity and not as a private citizen when he initiated BBI.
On the Popular Initiative, the appellate Judges were in agreement that President Uhuru Kenyatta cannot initiate a popular initiative as the constitution had given him appropriate instrument to makes changes if he so wanted.
The Judges also said that there was no evidence to show there was meaningful public participation which rendered the process Constitutionally unsustainable.