Nipate
Forum => Kenya Discussion => Topic started by: RV Pundit on March 27, 2017, 07:35:03 PM
-
Uhuru is nice guy but don't mistake that for weakness. Uhuru as lazy son of privilege has not time for war of attrition. Ruto is the guy who can ran a marathon with you -wearing and tiring you down - but Uhuru has not time or luxury for that.
Joho is going to very bad place very fast. Seem all gov machinery is now focused on him. Uhuru want to finish him from all angles -- he really need to even beef his security. His business is definitely going under...and he is definitely going to be battling in courts...criminal & civil cases.
Citizen TV Macharia was one first victim of Uhuru - whilst working as Moi's blue-eyed boy - he tried to literally cripple macharia business.
-
The Putin method of vindictiveness is a really bad thing for Kenya. Moi did it with Macharia et al, and people became jobless enmass. Now that Uhuru wants to use the govt to do the dirty job, I am against it.
-
So he is saying Joho did not finish high school. I have always wondered if anyone has ever seen kamwana's degree? Is there any evidence that kamwana graduated from college?
-
Crackhead Uhuru might have all the government machinery But Sultan Joho is with the people and the people are with Sultan Joho. Peoples voice is Gods Voice my friend. Enough is enough with intimidation and fear mongering.
Ruto found out real fast who Sultan Joho is when Sultan Joho delivered a fatal blow to Ruto political career on National TV live live...'Mwizi ni mwizi'..I doubt ruto will ever recover from that one.
Uhuru has climbed down the high horse, he is at Sultan Joho level now, Joho has exposed his weakness, he look drunk, high on drugs, bitter, angry, incoherent and deranged. matter of fact Joho look more presidential at this point because he is making his case based on truth and facts...when Joho says Uhuru want to move the port Jobs to naivasha ..fact.....when Joho say Uhuru owns half of Taita Taveta ...fact
-
Uhuru is definitely a hot head like his dad. Uhuru goes into rages and he may be in one right now. He cannot take pressure very well or defeat. If he senses right out rejection he will become unhinged.
Joho has to worry about Gema hounds they are the ones that are more dangerous to him than Uhuru. I have a feeling/speculate that outside political theater the two may know each other very well.
Uhuru is pulling a Moi.. Since Mombasa is hostile he wants/on advise of intelligence make it ungovernable like Moi did in 1992 and 1997.
Opposition needs to manage this situation slowly and calmly.
One thing Joho can do is get out of Kenya for a month
Put Joho may face Juma Jacob fate. Sad it as it is .. this is kenya
Kamotho is one man that used to beat Uhuru square in KANU politics and for this Uhuru would just not take it lightly. I bet you NASA threat may be too real for his comfort..
Ruto too needs to keep his distance until this prince tantrum subsidizes
Kamotho was one brilliant Einstein of party politics. Uhuru couldn't beat him even with his billions
-
Are you sure you're not talking about Trump??
Uhuru is definitely a hot head like his dad. Uhuru goes into rages and he may be in one right now. He cannot take pressure very well or defeat. If he senses right out rejection he will become unhinged.
Joho has to worry about Gema hounds they are the ones that are more dangerous to him than Uhuru. I have a feeling/speculate that outside political theater the two may know each other very well.
Uhuru is pulling a Moi.. Since Mombasa is hostile he wants/on advise of intelligence make it ungovernable like Moi did in 1992 and 1997.
Opposition needs to manage this situation slowly and calmly.
One thing Joho can do is get out of Kenya for a month
Put Joho may face Juma Jacob fate. Sad it as it is .. this is kenya
Kamotho is one man that used to beat Uhuru square in KANU politics and for this Uhuru would just not take it lightly. I bet you NASA threat may be too real for his comfort..
Ruto too needs to keep his distance until this prince tantrum subsidizes
Kamotho was one brilliant Einstein of party politics. Uhuru couldn't beat him even with his billions
-
Uhuru is nice guy but don't mistake that for weakness. Uhuru as lazy son of privilege has not time for war of attrition. Ruto is the guy who can ran a marathon with you -wearing and tiring you down - but Uhuru has not time or luxury for that.
Joho is going to very bad place very fast. Seem all gov machinery is now focused on him. Uhuru want to finish him from all angles -- he really need to even beef his security. His business is definitely going under...and he is definitely going to be battling in courts...criminal & civil cases.
Citizen TV Macharia was one first victim of Uhuru - whilst working as Moi's blue-eyed boy - he tried to literally cripple macharia business.
Joho KCSE certificate 1992 which he claimed he got a C+ is fake and its that certificate he used to enroll into Nairobi university then transferred the units to Kampala university to get a degree. Its that degree certificate he presented to become Governor. So the whole thing is a fraud. As such that a criminal offense (fraud) which I think he'll be indicted for. However his 1993 certificate of D- is legit and that's what he used to get a degree from Gretsa university.
KRA I think his company with the brother owes more than 60m officially and they've been evading taxes for sometime. This reminds of one Mutula Kilonzo who was very vocal critique of Kibaki government . KRA went after him and attached his M.P. salary up to now the family hasn't finished paying the debt. Most politicians are crooks who want political power to advance or protect their ill gotten wealth.
-
The focus on Joho alone show this it is vindictive witchhunt.Law should be applied fairly. Here Uhuru is just being vindictive. Joho obviously is not smart to enough to know when not to cross the line. Uhuru is very powerful as PORK. He is going to discover that PORK everywhere ought to be respected.
Joho KCSE certificate 1992 which he claimed he got a C+ is fake and its that certificate he used to enroll into Nairobi university then transferred the units to Kampala university to get a degree. Its that degree certificate he presented to become Governor. So the whole thing is a fraud. As such that a criminal offense (fraud) which I think he'll be indicted for. However his 1993 certificate of D- is legit and that's what he used to get a degree from Gretsa university.
KRA I think his company with the brother owes more than 60m officially and they've been evading taxes for sometime. This reminds of one Mutula Kilonzo who was very vocal critique of Kibaki government . KRA went after him and attached his M.P. salary up to now the family hasn't finished paying the debt. Most politicians are crooks who want political power to advance or protect their ill gotten wealth.
-
Pundit
The president of Kenya is a powerful man. It has always been like that and remains so despite the 2010 Constitution.
There is another constant: Presidents have from time time thrown about their powers and in countless instances embarked on a vindictive journey against a citizen. The methods used have varied and in fact have been reduced over the years. That is the point of departure.
Moi and Kenyatta had unlimited options. Kibaki inherited some but soon found them useless. He tried them in 2007 and almost lost the country. He was ready to surrender the useless powers in 2010.
In come Uhuru and he still believes he has the powers Moi and his Father Jomo had. He has not bothered to check if the guns he found can still fire or if the gunpowder has not been contaminated. He just believes he has the power and has been increasing brandishing the image of those powers.
Let's see, he has various options:
1. Scientific Exorcism*: He can order Joho EJK'd. In that event the least he can get is a kiss to all the votes in the Coast. At worst, he would face what Kibaki faced when his people were forced to return "home" in Nyeri, Murang'a etc and started eyeing the land that was once theirs and for which they got no compensation when it was seized. It could spread throughout the country. Right now Uhuru is deeply resented around the country outside Central (don't believe the so called "polls"). It's like a Gas Tanker that is leaking super petrol waiting for a lazy, drunken and careless AP to light a cigarette.
2. Administrative Tyranny: He can use the powers of his government to make life difficult for Joho. We already have the Police, The Provincial Admin.; The KRA, KPA, etc all working in tandem to get one man. Again this is an old weapon that has not been regularly fired. In the days of Moi, Joho would be on his knees begging. In fact you would only hear of it perhaps three years after fact. Now Grifters know that their career comes to an end when they appear in the media complete with mug photos, aliases and residences. Already the story is in the media. As Mike Cain (playing the wealthy big time grifter in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels) says of Steve Martin (acting the hand to mouth conman) when it is claimed that he was the best scammer in Europe: How good can he possibly be when he is in the newspapers?.
Even Moi had to eventually give up this. MoonKi would understand when I make reference to the Deadly weapon that one finds in Gulliver's Travels. It can be used to great destruction. It's a mass of land floating above and if it comes down would cause massive damage. But there is a caveat: Use it at your own peril!. In the end he had to let Matiba ruin his own hotels and businesses campaigning. S. K. Macharia btw is quite an experienced man when it comes to political persecution of his business. Ask him about Madhupaper etc. Here is what I found :In 1979, Macharia left the Public Service to run Madhupaper International Kenya Limited, a tissue production company he had started three years earlier. By 1985, Madhupaper had 300 employees and its main product Rosy was becoming a household brand. Madhupaper was the only tissue manufacturer in Kenya at the time. On 25 October 1985, Kenya Commercial Bank placed Madhupaper under receivership in what Macharia believes was political persecution by the Moi government.[7][8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Kamau_Macharia
3. Legal Jungle: He could inflict some damage using the courts. It is the same courts that will also provide relief to Joho. The DPP as he nears the end of his tenure and looks beyond the horizon for international jobs has become less useful as we saw with the Ouko Persecution. He not only refused to prefer kangaroo charges on Ouko but he went public to reveal the intrigue.
I am not sure what the purpose of the freezing of bank accounts is. It will probably paralyze legitimate business. Uhuru has to ask himself if he banks all the money he dishes out to politicians. If the answer is yes, then he should know he is back in the US or has migrated to Europe having left Kenya a long time ago. In the end the taxpayer will foot the bill of this mischief and Joho will have lost no sweat.
Pundit, the bottom line is that both Uhuru and Joho are racing for August 8. Whoever between them is NOT smiling on 9th or 10th will find his knees and lower them to the ground.
--------------------------
*Scientific Exorcism = Assassination (Soyinka)
-
I agree with you Omollo.This seem to be a zero sum game btw Joho & Uhuru. This smack of abuse of power but let hope they don't erode the trust and independence of institutions.
-
I agree with you Omollo.This seem to be a zero sum game btw Joho & Uhuru. This smack of abuse of power but let hope they don't erode the trust and independence of institutions.
The showmanship is hurting. Both are public servants and now spend most of the energy on shadow boxing. Uhuru has aligned his administration in Coast to fight Joho. Joho has aligned his political machinery, County personnel etc to fight back. The whole thing is a comedy of sorts. There are bribes flowing from both sides. The NIS, CID, Police, etc are bribing Joho's people to get information or sabotage. Joho has got Uhuru's people on the "bahasha" queue. That includes Marwa!!!
I think the Bribe Takers don't want it to end anytime soon. Reminded me of The Government Inspector ~ Nikolai Gogol
JUDGE. H'm, some mischief was brewing, I know ! . . . But I was going to say, Anton Antonovich, that I had got a puppy to make you a present of—own sister to the dog you know about. I daresay you've heard that Cheptovich and Varkhovinski have
gone to law with one another; so now I live in clover—I hunt hares first on one's estate, and then on the other's.
-
Kibaki had high regard for institutions, but under Uhuru is something else.
If he wins, and parliament is what it currently is then we are doomed.
I agree with you Omollo.This seem to be a zero sum game btw Joho & Uhuru. This smack of abuse of power but let hope they don't erode the trust and independence of institutions.
-
President can't stop pushing the boundaries. He is a politician. The heads of the other arms will naturally try to dominate the other arms. It is the one that opens its arms and spreads them that get's screwed. Parliament has willingly voted away its powers without asking where they are going. Of course when there will be a president they won't like - be it Raila or Ruto - then one will hear about separation of powers and demonstrations in Washington and London outside Kenyan embassies.
Uhuru should pray hard he wins. He should also pray harder that it be Raila who takes over from him. Because anybody else will not stop the forces that are bent against him. Sadly for him, he has made it very easy to persecute a Kenyan. He can be detained and prevented from accessing certain areas of the country; He can barred from conducting meetings outside his county; He can have his bank accounts frozen for as long as KRA wishes; He can sit in jail without bail for two weeks or more (depends on friendly magistrates and judges as well as the Public Security Act he amended); He can have his phones and other communication routinely monitored by the NIS, CID, Police, etc; He must declare all the armoured cars he has got to ensure that he is only EJK'ed in the ones that are not armored!
Oh yes, there is the EJK... no investigations required and one can always deny it.
Kibaki had high regard for institutions, but under Uhuru is something else.
If he wins, and parliament is what it currently is then we are doomed.
I agree with you Omollo.This seem to be a zero sum game btw Joho & Uhuru. This smack of abuse of power but let hope they don't erode the trust and independence of institutions.
-
Joho KCSE certificate 1992 which he claimed he got a C+ is fake and its that certificate he used to enroll into Nairobi university then transferred the units to Kampala university to get a degree. Its that degree certificate he presented to become Governor. So the whole thing is a fraud. As such that a criminal offense (fraud) which I think he'll be indicted for. However his 1993 certificate of D- is legit and that's what he used to get a degree from Gretsa university.
Very peculiar logic that would yield interesting results if applied to, say, someone who gets into university without graduating from high school and then does really well at university.
Did the university in Kampala grant him a degree on the basis of the what he did at the university, as a normal university would, or did it grant him a degree on the basis of his KCSE certificate? If the former, then what is the exact problem with his degree?
-
Joho KCSE certificate 1992 which he claimed he got a C+ is fake and its that certificate he used to enroll into Nairobi university then transferred the units to Kampala university to get a degree. Its that degree certificate he presented to become Governor. So the whole thing is a fraud. As such that a criminal offense (fraud) which I think he'll be indicted for. However his 1993 certificate of D- is legit and that's what he used to get a degree from Gretsa university.
Very peculiar logic that would yield interesting results if applied to, say, someone who gets into university without graduating from high school and then does really well at university.
Did the university in Kampala grant him a degree on the basis of the what he did at the university, as a normal university would, or did it grant him a degree on the basis of his KCSE certificate? If the former, then what is the exact problem with his degree?
I can't dig up the precedence right now but that has long been exhausted. The courts agreed with your line of thought years ago (unless I am mistaken). There is also the little question of autonomy. Universities are autonomous and can admit just about anybody really.
I stand to be corrected but wherever the university indicates the minimum requirements for admission, it provides for discretion in determining that minimum competence. Once admitted you obtain the degree based on your performance in that university NOT your KCSE certificate.
I was not the first to observe though: The KNEC letter to the CID contained serious grammatical mistakes. In addition it contained a legal oxymoron. Something about the certificate being based on a counterfeit document. The letter is signed by the CEO of the Kenya National Examinations Council (KNEC). I am still waiting to hear if it is indeed genuine.
-
Joho KCSE certificate 1992 which he claimed he got a C+ is fake and its that certificate he used to enroll into Nairobi university then transferred the units to Kampala university to get a degree. Its that degree certificate he presented to become Governor. So the whole thing is a fraud. As such that a criminal offense (fraud) which I think he'll be indicted for. However his 1993 certificate of D- is legit and that's what he used to get a degree from Gretsa university.
Very peculiar logic that would yield interesting results if applied to, say, someone who gets into university without graduating from high school and then does really well at university.
Did the university in Kampala grant him a degree on the basis of the what he did at the university, as a normal university would, or did it grant him a degree on the basis of his KCSE certificate? If the former, then what is the exact problem with his degree?
That's true. The issue should be if the degree he got is valid. The rest, such as the forgery claim, I guess is fraud. A Chapter Six issue. Something we all know was very dead and buried in that little corner of the world by the time 2013 came around.
-
Uhuru is nice guy but don't mistake that for weakness.
The crude abuse of state power to deal with petty personal conflicts actually shows a weak character. It also shows that the country's major governance institutions aren't functioning as they should, that senior civil servants don't quite understand their roles, etc.
-
Our friend Magufooli in TZ is quite the weak character you're looking at. I think most people acknowledge Uhuru can be as gentlemanly as Kibaki could be or as humble as Moi ever was...but everyone has a weakness. Raila coup of 82 transformed humble christian Moi into monster - a control freak who governed in fear of being ousted. But despite all that Moi was still reluctant to abuse his powers fully..like say Amin..and handed over a country that was on it's knees but not broken...and still managed to preach every sunday.
Raila is a monster few want to give a chance...he is vengeful dictator who'd rival Amin.
The crude abuse of state power to deal with petty personal conflicts actually shows a weak character. It also shows that the country's major governance institutions aren't functioning as they should, that senior civil servants don't quite understand their roles, etc.
-
Our friend Magufooli in TZ is quite the weak character you're looking at. I think most people acknowledge Uhuru can be as gentlemanly as Kibaki could be or as humble as Moi ever was...but everyone has a weakness. Raila coup of 82 transformed humble christian Moi into monster - a control freak who governed in fear of being ousted. But despite all that Moi was still reluctant to abuse his powers fully..like say Amin..and hand over a country that was on it's knees but not broken.
Raila is a monster few want to give a chance...he is vengeful dictator who'd rival Amin.
The crude abuse of state power to deal with petty personal conflicts actually shows a weak character. It also shows that the country's major governance institutions aren't functioning as they should, that senior civil servants don't quite understand their roles, etc.
You just described Ruto. Raila would bring Kikuyu oligarchs to their knees which is good for Kenya
-
Ruto is too intelligent and hardworking to resort to short-cuts - most of weak leaders who became dictators - are reluctant to put the hardwork into politics- like you'd expect in first world where there are no short cuts. Ruto doesn't have to resort to dictatorship to govern. He is too smart, too nimble and too adept for any of his opponent. The the guy is all over and still doing a phd :). Uhuru has resorted to short-cuts because he thinks Joho is unbeatable in coast - Ruto has been putting in the hard work nearly weekly in coas - and I believe Joho- like that Cheptegei of Uganda - was gone soon crack (he only has Kingi now)- and Ruto Kamworor would have emerged like a real Nandi Warrior - the victor - in the war of attrition that is modern politics.
You just described Ruto. Raila would bring Kikuyu oligarchs to their knees which is good for Kenya
-
In any case, it's time to do away with the degree(education) requirement for public office. It's nonsensical.
-
Totally agree. It is unconstitutional only that some morons made it constitutional. it total BS. Maybe folks wanted to prevent another Moi. But I am believer that anyone..a felon, an indicted criminal or etc should be allowed to seek for votes..if people want Judas or barbaras ...and not Jesus the saviour...people get it. 2,000 yrs ago..the romans knew that.
In any case, it's time to do away with the degree(education) requirement for public office. It's nonsensical.
-
Nandi warrior were beaten by German mecernaries and koitael burried like a dog. Ruto people killed Jacob juma. So tell us another thing about ruto hard work. Ruto is a thief. If he was honest and hardworking he would be the most trusted guy in Kenya. He is also an intolerant insecure man
-
In any case, it's time to do away with the degree(education) requirement for public office. It's nonsensical.
Definitely a bizarre requirement.
-
The fact that it may be written in the constitution does not in any way make it infallible. It can be struck down by any competent court.
In any case, it's time to do away with the degree(education) requirement for public office. It's nonsensical.
General Admissions Criteria - University of Nairobi
Degree Courses
Tags: courses Degree
Admission to Bachelor’s Degree Programmes will be based on any one of the following minimum qualifications:
KCSE mean grade C+ or equivalent
KCSE mean grade C- or equivalent plus a Certificate and Diploma
O Level Division II or equivalent plus a Diploma
O Level Division III or equivalent plus a Certificate and Diploma
O Level Division III or equivalent plus a three-year Diploma from a recognized post secondary Institution for admissions to Bachelor of Education
Diploma from University of Nairobi or other recognized institutions and an aggregate of C in KCSE or equivalent
A Level with two principal passes or equivalent in relevant subjects Only Applicants whose results are available at the time of application will be considered
CPAII/CPSII/CIPS or equivalent for Commerce and Arts and should have attained an aggregate of C in KCSE or O level Division III
P1 from a two-year post secondary training institution for entry into Bachelor of Education with Minimum KCSE Mean Grade C or O Level Division III
Higher National Diploma in relevant fields and should have attained an aggregate of C in KCSE
Degree from a recognized University
Equivalent qualifications to the above from institutions recognised by Senate
O Level Division III or equivalent plus a three-year Diploma from a recognized post secondary Institution for admissions to Bachelor of Education
Diploma from University of Nairobi or other recognized institutions and an aggregate of C in KCSE or equivalent
A Level with two principal passes or equivalent in relevant subjects Only Applicants whose results are available at the time of application will be considered
CPAII/CPSII/CIPS or equivalent for Commerce and Arts and should have attained an aggregate of C in KCSE or O level Division III
P1 from a two-year post secondary training institution for entry into Bachelor of Education with Minimum KCSE Mean Grade C or O Level Division III
Higher National Diploma in relevant fields and should have attained an aggregate of C in KCSE
Degree from a recognized University
Equivalent qualifications to the above from institutions recognised by Senate
-
Pundit, what is Uhuru Kenyatta's end game in this? What does he hope to gain? How will this help Jubilee?
-
The fact that it may be written in the constitution does not in any way make it infallible. It can be struck down by any competent court.
A court strike out something that is in the constitution? Not really.
Still, this degree requirement is not in the constitution. It is in the Elections Act, and I think it should be possible to argue that it is unconstitutional on the basis that it interferes with what is a fundamental right in the constitution: Article 38. Every adult citizen has the right, without unreasonable restrictions, to be a candidate for public office…and, if elected, to hold office.
-
If such a provision were there and it clearly curtailed, limited or removed a right or rights conferred on a person, it would in effect amount to an obnoxious contradiction which would be struck out. There are many examples the world over.
The election laws are in my opinion largely unconstitutional in that they limit or curtail the rights of a citizen. For example provisions on education, Requirement to pre-register to vote and be voted for, Presidential Term Limit, Identification Card, etc
While modern democracies are celebrating the removal of property ownership as a precondition for being voted for, Kenya is doing the opposite:(2) A person is disqualified from being elected a member of Parliament if the
person—
(a) is a State officer or other public officer, other than a member of
Parliament;
(b) has, at any time within the five years immediately preceding the date
of election, held office as a member of the Commission;
(c) has not been a citizen of Kenya for at least the ten years immediately
preceding the date of election;
(d) is a member of a county assembly;
(e) is of unsound mind;
(f) is an undischarged bankrupt;
The fact that it may be written in the constitution does not in any way make it infallible. It can be struck down by any competent court.
A court strike out something that is in the constitution? I doubt it.
Still, this degree requirement is not in the constitution, which only specifies that there may be some educational requirements. It is in the Elections Act, and I think it should be possible to argue that it is unconstitutional on the basis that it interferes with what is a fundamental right in the constitution: Article 38. Every adult citizen has the right, without unreasonable restrictions, to be a candidate for public office…and, if elected, to hold office.
-
Pundit, what is Uhuru Kenyatta's end game in this? What does he hope to gain? How will this help Jubilee?
Distraction.
The IEBC is still quietly single sourcing (https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001233900/iebc-finally-single-sources-for-disputed-tender-to-beat-deadline) the BVR kits while NASA's attention is fully on the Joho-bone thrown at them to gnaw at.
-
If such a provision were there and it clearly curtailed, limited or removed a right or rights conferred on a person, it would in effect amount to an obnoxious contradiction which would be struck out. There are many examples the world over.
The election laws are in my opinion largely unconstitutional in that they limit or curtail the rights of a citizen. For example provisions on education, Requirement to pre-register to vote and be voted for, Presidential Term Limit, Identification Card, etc
While modern democracies are celebrating the removal of property ownership as a precondition for being voted for, Kenya is doing the opposite:(2) A person is disqualified from being elected a member of Parliament if the
person—
(a) is a State officer or other public officer, other than a member of
Parliament;
(b) has, at any time within the five years immediately preceding the date
of election, held office as a member of the Commission;
(c) has not been a citizen of Kenya for at least the ten years immediately
preceding the date of election;
(d) is a member of a county assembly;
(e) is of unsound mind;
(f) is an undischarged bankrupt;
You lost me somewhere ... probably because you are not making a distinction between the Elections Act and the Constitution. Some of what you have above (including that bit of the law) are in the constitution, and I don't know what it means to say that a part of the constitution is unconstitutional.
In any case, the problem with the degree provision is not merely that it interferes with certain rights; it is that it is unreasonable. The constitution of Kenya, like many others, recognizes that there might be times and circumstances during and under which certain rights may be interfered with, and there is nothing fundamentally wrong with that. Article 24 of the Kenyan constitution devotes a fair amount of ink to that.
On that one I can't even imagine where you are headed.
To my mind, the Constitution of Kenya is a pretty good piece of work, and off the top of my head, I can't think of any problematic aspects. As I see it, the real problems are in the laws that the MPs knock off.
-
Ndugu MoonKi
Where did you lose me?
I answered you about certain provisions being struck down. I had in principal agreed with your earlier postulation that some of the provisions in the Elections Act were undemocratic.
I made a second point but upon reading I should have known who I was addressing and gone about it with utmost care. Let me try again: The entire Elections Act IMHO is founded on undemocratic principals. Some of the provisions curtail specific rights already granted by the constitution. I went ahead to agree with you on the Education Requirements and added a few. I then quoted the section of the offending law that I found most irritating.
The number of degree holders in a population of 48 Million human beings tells you that the Presidency and other elective posts are limited to a tiny minority. If you look at the number of stand 8 leavers who fail to reach form four again you realize just how we should stop telling those humans that they have EQUAL opportunity.
Sovereignty we are told lies with the people of Kenya. Yet they are prevented from electing whoever they so wish to elect. A group of professional thieves, murderers and deal makers tell them that unless they excel in Modern Ritualism they have no chance.
You lost me somewhere ... probably because you are not making a distinction between the Elections Act and the Constitution. Some of what you have above (including that bit of the law) are in the constitution, and I don't know what it means to say that a part of the constitution is unconstitutional.
In any case, the problem with the degree provision is not merely that it interferes with certain rights; it is that it is unreasonable. The constitution of Kenya, like many others, recognizes that there might be times and circumstances during and under which certain rights may be interfered with, and there is nothing fundamentally wrong with that. Article 24 of the Kenyan constitution devotes a fair amount of ink to that.
-
Ruto's only goal is to gain as much power as he can - materially, patronizing others, and in any other form. He wants to beat Biwott at his game.
Nandi warrior were beaten by German mecernaries and koitael burried like a dog. Ruto people killed Jacob juma. So tell us another thing about ruto hard work. Ruto is a thief. If he was honest and hardworking he would be the most trusted guy in Kenya. He is also an intolerant insecure man
-
The deal with the French company sanctioned by Chibukati is to write certain code in the software to allow Uhuru to win. They will also allow access to the voting result system so it can be remotely manipulated and if possible crashed. I am told they also want portions of the BVR such as fingerprints or entire BVR disabled to allow double voting.
Is there anything else that NASA does not know?
They blackmailed the Chair and CEO to make those decisions. Just like the NIS has been blackmailing Kalonzo threatening Joho-like charges.
Jubilee has panicked badly. It is just my hope they don't resort to killing more people than the ones they have targeted in Western, Coast and of course Kisii. That is the biggest danger to the cohesion of the country.
Pundit, what is Uhuru Kenyatta's end game in this? What does he hope to gain? How will this help Jubilee?
Distraction.
The IEBC is still quietly single sourcing (https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001233900/iebc-finally-single-sources-for-disputed-tender-to-beat-deadline) the BVR kits while NASA's attention is fully on the Joho-bone thrown at them to gnaw at.
-
Some of the greatest thikners were not that educated. Serving others was their goal. Lincoln, FDR etc.
In any case, it's time to do away with the degree(education) requirement for public office. It's nonsensical.
-
Ndugu MoonKi
Where did you lose me?
I answered you about certain provisions being struck down. I had in principal agreed with your earlier postulation that some of the provisions in the Elections Act were undemocratic.
You lost me on the notion that certain rights are completely untouchable. I am also actually unclear on what it means to strike down a part of the constitution.
I made a second point but upon reading I should have known who I was addressing and gone about it with utmost care. Let me try again: The entire Elections Act IMHO is founded on undemocratic principals. Some of the provisions curtail specific rights already granted by the constitution. I went ahead to agree with you on the Education Requirements and added a few. I then quoted the section of the offending law that I found most irritating.
What you quoted was this:
(2) A person is disqualified from being elected a member of Parliament if the
person—
(a) is a State officer or other public officer, other than a member of
Parliament;
(b) has, at any time within the five years immediately preceding the date
of election, held office as a member of the Commission;
(c) has not been a citizen of Kenya for at least the ten years immediately
preceding the date of election;
(d) is a member of a county assembly;
(e) is of unsound mind;
(f) is an undischarged bankrupt;
But that is in the Constitution, so I was unclear as to whether your "issues" are with the Constitution or with the Elections Act.
The number of degree holders in a population of 48 Million human beings tells you that the Presidency and other elective posts are limited to a tiny minority. If you look at the number of stand 8 leavers who fail to reach form four again you realize just how we should stop telling those humans that they have EQUAL opportunity.
Obviously, I agree that the degree requirement is absurd. And, yes, the Elections Act (a creature of MPs) does have parts that are problematic with respect to the Constitution.
Sovereignty we are told lies with the people of Kenya. Yet they are prevented from electing whoever they so wish to elect. A group of professional thieves, murderers and deal makers tell them that unless they excel in Modern Ritualism they have no chance.
I really don't know what exactly the "sovereignty of the people" means, but most places will have some requirements for who can stand for office. In Kenya, because of our history, we thought it useful to have "Chapter 6". True, we have ignored it---whence the influential "thieves" and "murderers" that you complain of---but that's quite a different matter, and I can't think of many who are unhappy with Chapter 6 on the grounds that the sovereign people should be entitled to elect thieves, murderers, etc.
-
MoonKi,
Omollo is spinning quickly than his brain can process. So unconstitutional Constitution becomes a thing in his alternative facts and reality . Only Referendum or Legislative body that can amend this Katiba. He reminds me of Kibaki games against constitution. he could not understand the document he hoisted at Uhuru park. He wanted to appoint CJ and many others without following the Katiba.. Baba had his 2 minutes of fame with Okoa Baba referanda
-
You lost me on the notion that certain rights are completely untouchable. I am also actually unclear on what it means to strike down a part of the constitution.
Is that when I wrote and you quoted this: The fact that it may be written in the constitution does not in any way make it infallible. It can be struck down by any competent court.
Somehow I thought I was saying the opposite.
What you quoted was this:
(2) A person is disqualified from being elected a member of Parliament if the person—
(a) is a State officer or other public officer, other than a member of Parliament;
(b) has, at any time within the five years immediately preceding the date of election, held office as a member of the Commission;
(c) has not been a citizen of Kenya for at least the ten years immediately preceding the date of election;
(d) is a member of a county assembly;
(e) is of unsound mind;
(f) is an undischarged bankrupt;
But that is in the Constitution, so I was unclear as to whether your "issues" are with the Constitution or with the Elections Act.
Would you like to share with me which part of the constitution this is? I quoted The Elections Act, 2011.
Obviously, I agree that the degree requirement is absurd. And, yes, the Elections Act (a creature of MPs) does have parts that are problematic with respect to the Constitution.
I would wish to know what is NOT problematic in that act. The constitution states: ... (d) universal suffrage based on the aspiration for fair representation and equality of vote; and
(e) free and fair elections ...
How equal is the voter without a degree to the one with such in the election of President and Governor etc?
I really don't know what exactly the "sovereignty of the people" means, but most places will have some requirements for who can stand for office. In Kenya, because of our history, we thought it useful to have "Chapter 6". True, we have ignored it---whence the influential "thieves" and "murderers" that you complain of---but that's quite a different matter, and I can't think of many who are unhappy with Chapter 6 on the grounds that the sovereign people should be entitled to elect thieves, murderers, etc.
It is up to the people to decide if they accept those murderers and thieves. You can only get as good people as they are in Kenya. How can you expect to find a God Fearing Man on Pirate Island? If Uhuru had sought election in a decent country whose people have learned to value whatever you prescribe in Chapter 6, he would never be elected. Of course I am aware that the threshold recently lost height in the US in recent months.
It is a balance. If you seek democracy then it is impossible to then prescribe, discriminate and choose. A people seeking sovereignty must guard it to avoid losing it. It is the unwillingness of Kenyans to embrace who they are that leads to these cosmetic qualifications in the constitution and laws that seek to dilute the already mild provisions in the constitution. This only delays the inevitable denouement that is essential for Kenyans to wake up.
-
(2) A person is disqualified from being elected a member of Parliament if the person—
(a) is a State officer or other public officer, other than a member of Parliament;
(b) has, at any time within the five years immediately preceding the date of election, held office as a member of the Commission;
(c) has not been a citizen of Kenya for at least the ten years immediately preceding the date of election;
(d) is a member of a county assembly;
(e) is of unsound mind;
(f) is an undischarged bankrupt;
But that is in the Constitution, so I was unclear as to whether your "issues" are with the Constitution or with the Elections Act.
Would you like to share with me which part of the constitution this is? I quoted The Elections Act, 2011.
Yes, I would. It is Article 99(2) of the Constitution.
It is a balance. If you seek democracy then it is impossible to then prescribe, discriminate and choose.
I don't know what you mean by "impossible". That it is very possible is evident from the fact that it is what happens all the time, all over the place. If you care to list democratic countries that do not have any requirements for candidates for legislative office, that might help to clarify your stance.
-
Yes, I would. It is Article 99(2) of the Constitution.
In that case Article 99(2) and the relevant sections of the Elections Act, 2011 seriously curtail and limit the rights conferred by the constitution. It is my position that such provisions are NOT infallible and can and should be challenged and removed. For starters they make votes to be unequal. They take away the rights of some people to fully enjoy all the rights a vote is supposed to confer, such as being eligible to be elected president
I don't know what you mean by "impossible". That it is very possible is evident from the fact that it is what happens all the time, all over the place. If you care to list democratic countries that do not have any requirements for candidates for legislative office, that might help to clarify your stance.
1. In all the oppressive countries where minorities have tyrannized over mâjority, the constitution has provided for universal suffrage (in some cases male suffrage). However the legislatures have followed up with laws that then limit those rights. The requirements you mention have been most effective in curtailing those rights. Whether gender, race, property, mental health, education, land ownership (separate from property where some niggers bought shanties on leased land), residence etc.
2. I am saying one cannot seek perfect democracy (i will hear that again) while allowing qualifications. A Right that is qualified ends up being a right denied.
3. I cannot list countries without qualifications for legislative office. There is probably none. But I can say that most countries have sought to remove restrictions. For example you do not need to pay any money anywhere to run for office in Sweden, Norway, etc. All due fees are covered. Membership to political parties may require a token payment to show commitment and to limit fraud but whatever is paid is then heavily subsidized by the State. Part of the funding for political parties goes towards ensuring there are no costs imposed on candidates as to limit participation. Right now one has to be a millionaire to run for any office in Kenya. Just look at the fees collected by political parties and the IEBC. As we go further from these few countries we find restrictions increasing. What is the difference between Jim Crow Laws that insisted on literacy for Negroes before they could get a vote and the education requirements now being thrown around? How about Language requirements? Let me more specific
4.- (a) is registered as a voter;
If you seriously examine the whole idea of registration you will find that it is insincere and the reasons cited false. Kenya is the one country where citizens are over-registered. That a separate registration should be required for participation in elections is simply crazy. Kenyans are registered at Birth in the Register of Births (and Deaths); At 18, they have to go to the government to be registered again and issued with an ID card. To get registered for that ID, they need to separately go to the Registrar of Births (and deaths) to obtain proof that they were born in Kenya and they are still alive. Those who travel will again seek all those documents to obtain a passport. Those who may have become "criminals" have their details entered in several databases including a Fingerprints database of Criminals. The Prison service has one such. The NIS, CID etc have their own known but unofficial databases.
So why should anybody register to vote?
- (b) satisfies any educational, moral and ethical requirements prescribed by this Constitution or by an Act of Parliament; and
I have discussed the education requirement already and will not compound it. However the moral and ethical requirements remain an issue. Do we have an Ethics Code? Who determines what or who is moral? I really want to have Chapter six in the constitution. But we do not yet have a parliament that can draw up a moral code and set up a foolproof implementation structure. With two suspected war criminals running the country assisted by drug barons, robbers who carry money in bags, I see no reason why we should even bother with this.
- (c) is nominated by a political party, or is an independent candidate who is supported––
(i) in the case of election to the National Assembly, by at least one thousand registered voters in the constituency; or
(ii) in the case of election to the Senate, by at least two thousand registered voters in the county.
Should I laugh or cry? Do you support this one MoonKi?
[/list]
-
Yes, I would. It is Article 99(2) of the Constitution.
In that case Article 99(2) and the relevant sections of the Elections Act, 2011 seriously curtail and limit the rights conferred by the constitution. It is my position that such provisions are NOT infallible and can and should be challenged and removed.
There is a path, laid down in law, for changing any part of the Constitution; so we can leave that one there.
I don't know what you mean by "impossible". That it is very possible is evident from the fact that it is what happens all the time, all over the place. If you care to list democratic countries that do not have any requirements for candidates for legislative office, that might help to clarify your stance.
3. I cannot list countries without qualifications for legislative office. There is probably none.
In that case, that one too can be left there.
You write that:
I really want to have Chapter six in the constitution.
That is after, in your battle for "democracy", you insisted that:
It is up to the people to decide if they accept those murderers and thieves.
Another one that we may leave just there.
(c) is nominated by a political party, or is an independent candidate who is supported––
(i) in the case of election to the National Assembly, by at least one thousand registered voters in the constituency; or
(ii) in the case of election to the Senate, by at least two thousand registered voters in the county.
Should I laugh or cry? Do you support this one MoonKi?
I have no views on that one, other than to say that some mechanism is required to stop frivolous candidates. There are all sort of "ballot access" rules all over the place, and some are very similar to the ones that have left you torn between tears and laughter. As an example, take a look at those in Colorado.[/list]
-
I have no views on that one, other than to say that some mechanism is required to stop frivolous candidates. There are all sort of "ballot access" rules all over the place, and some are very similar to the ones that have left you torn between tears and laughter. As an example, take a look at those in Colorado.[/list]
Let's us say I see it differently.
Note that when I said I would like to see Chapter 6 remain in the constitution I intended to clearly state that that would be subject to it not undermining, curtailing or limiting anybody's democratic rights. If people don't want anything let them get rid of it. I see you trust them to amend the constitution to remove the portions that limit their rights. Wake me up when they do.
Frivolous? Who says?
https://www.omrlp.com/
-
Generally am not happy when I see people talking about what the constitution or the various laws say about the rights of this and that as if it matters.
When will people understand that Kenya is governed by the whims of individuals and not by the rule of law ?
-
I'm sure you do. Nevertheless, there it is.
Those "democratic rights" that you are so concerned about do not fall from Heaven, which is why "democratic rights" vary from country to country. In Kenya, the rights are only and exactly what the Constitution says they are. And that same constitution states---see Article 19(3)(c), Bill of Rights---that said rights are subject to limitations stated elsewhere in the Constitution.
You should to give up this idea that the rights are so sacrosanct that they cannot be touched in any way. Even the most fundamental right---that to life---runs into death sentences for serious criminality
I neither stated nor implied anything of the sort; I simply made an observation of fact. I will, however, note that the Constitution that has you so worked up went through a national referendum, and the citizens had their say. (Whether or not they fully understood is entirely another matter.)
Someone has to say it, and apparently someone has.
Then we will leave it at that. Clearly we cannot agree. I neither believe that because Moi (and before him Kenyatta) limited and in many cases took away individual rights through constitutional amendments etc, that those rights did not exist nor do i believe persons lost the right to those Rights just because the dictators' constitutions said so
There are International Treaties, Conventions and Agreements not least through the UN which by and large underpin those rights. You took a sloppy vector with that belief. You should be every dictator's favorite "visiting Human Rights Expert". I am sure El Bashir would break in to a dance just hearing you say: In [Sudan] the rights are only and exactly what the Constitution says they are. He would add NOTHING ELSE!!!
-
Let's us say I see it differently.
I'm sure you do. Nevertheless, there it is.
Note that when I said I would like to see Chapter 6 remain in the constitution I intended to clearly state that that would be subject to it not undermining, curtailing or limiting anybody's democratic rights. If people don't want anything let them get rid of it.
Those "democratic rights" that you are so concerned about do not fall from Heaven, which is why "democratic rights" vary from country to country. In Kenya, the rights are only and exactly what the Constitution says they are. And that same constitution states---see Article 19(3)(c), Bill of Rights---that said rights are subject to limitations stated elsewhere in the Constitution.
You should to give up this idea that the rights are so sacrosanct that they cannot be touched in any way. Even the most fundamental right---that to life---runs into death sentences for serious criminality.
I see you trust them to amend the constitution to remove the portions that limit their rights. Wake me up when they do.
I neither stated nor implied anything of the sort; I simply made an observation of fact. I will, however, note that the Constitution that has you so worked up went through a national referendum, and the citizens had their say. (Whether or not they fully understood is entirely another matter.)
Frivolous? Who says?
Someone has to say it, and apparently someone has.
-
There are International Treaties, Conventions and Agreements not least through the UN which by and large underpin those rights.
Clarifying revision:
First, those basic human rights, are, as far as I know, largely reflected in the Kenyan constitution, which is good (and unlike, say, Sudan). But they are not all absolute, in the sense that all come without any qualifications that would permit restrictions.
Second, what you have been writing at length about is on who can or cannot run for office. What the UN Human Rights Charter, for example, says is that:
Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions:
(a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives;
(b) To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors;
(c) To have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country.
It doesn't say that there must not be any restrictions; what is says is that there must not be unreasonable restrictions.
Earlier you wrote that:
Note that when I said I would like to see Chapter 6 remain in the constitution I intended to clearly state that that would be subject to it not undermining, curtailing or limiting anybody's democratic rights. If people don't want anything let them get rid of it.
I'm not even sure I know what parts of Chapter 6 (of itself) can, in any way, be seen to be "undermining, curtailing or limiting anybody's democratic rights". Would you care to point them out? It could well be that you are, as many often do, confusing Chapter 6 with other, separate laws and rules, that purport to give it effect.
You should be every dictator's favorite "visiting Human Rights Expert". I am sure El Bashir would break in to a dance just hearing you say: In [Sudan] the rights are only and exactly what the Constitution says they are. He would add NOTHING ELSE!!!
Not quite. Please note that my comment on that was on Kenya and its present constitution. (See the "In Kenya ..." and the references to a part of that Constitution?). Now, what is significant about that Constitution is that the people of Kenya voted for it, something which is not the case with Sudan's. And if Kenyans wish to claim more that what is in the current Constitution, they are free to change it. Until then, they have to make do with what they agreed to, and claiming some unspecified rights from some other place won't do much good.
Also when I write that
In Kenya, the rights are only and exactly what the Constitution says they are.
it reflects (a) the legal reality that going into a Kenyan court to claim rights that are not in the Constitution won't fly, because the law doesn't recognize any other rights, and (b) more importantly, my view that the Constitution is already pretty good. So instead of a generic "International Treaties, Conventions and Agreements not least through the UN", what you might do is state what rights you think are missing, and we can then make progress by discussing those.
-
something I wrote is missing from this thread.