Koitamet Ole Kina was one of the agents appointed by the National Super Alliance to watch over the presidential election results at the national tallying centre at the Bomas of Kenya. His statement, sworn in support of the election petition filed at the Supreme Court by Nasa presidential candidate Raila Odinga and his running mate Kalonzo Musyoka, reveals that the elections results portal started transmitting results a mere 15 minutes after voting closed countrywide –a seeming impossibility even for polling stations with very small numbers. He also lists a series of false unfulfilled promises by the IEBC to supply formal documents to support the results being announced and recounts how agents were given the runaround by IEBC. It is a catalogue of the deception and brazen duplicity that characterised how the announcement of the presidential election results was delivered. Mr Ole Kina’s affidavit, below, has been edited for brevity and clarity.
“I arrived at Bomas of Kenya on August 8, 2017 at 1630 HRS to activate my access card. The process took about an hour. During this time, I was seated at the Auditorium chatting with Ms Hamida Kibwana, Mr Oduor Ong’wen and other agents who were also waiting for their cards to be activated. At about 1715 HRS, results started streaming into the IEBC portal.
As soon as the results started streaming, I settled down to follow the process. I soon realized, and my team members agreed, that there was no way we could verify the results on the IEBC portal without either the hard copies of Form 34A or the soft copies that IEBC was receiving in their server. We therefore approached Commissioners Prof Guliye and Roselyn Akombe as well as CEO Ezra Chiloba and requested them to [supply] the Form 34B for purposes of verification of the streaming results.
We waited for their response for about one hour to no avail, hence prompting us to seek an urgent meeting with the commission. The chair, some commissioners and members of the secretariat led by the CEO attended the meeting.
Since the questions being raised related to transmission of results, the Chairman invited the commission’s ICT officers and Saffron consultants to the meeting.
I complained that my team was not able to access Forms 34A or B on the IEBC portal. Prof Guliye asked the consultant to facilitate access to the documents but the Saffron consultant said he couldn’t as there was a problem with the system. According to him a lot of data that was unaccompanied by the image as required had arrived and that we had to wait for the image to upload as soon as the KIEMS [Kenya Integrated Elections Management System] reached a physical location with either 3G or 4G. He further stated that there was also a possibility that this data would not come at all.
A question on whether they could configure the system to pause the data without an image and allow only data with an image that could be verified to come through was raised. The consultant answered that he would require eight (8.) days to do so. When further pushed to then allow our IT [information technology] team to access the system, he asked for six hours to create email addresses. We couldn’t understand why he required six (6) hours for an action that would take 10 minutes. He pleaded for two hours. At the end of the two hours, he [provided] an email address for our team and [authorized] a workstation already created in the main auditorium be used to access the Form 34Bs.
When the IT team (a Mr Walubengo and Joseph Akhenda) embarked on the process, the link provided was not working. In short, my IT team was taken round the whole night and was only able to access one Form 34A on August 9, in the morning. Even then, our credentials were revoked within one hour of granting access when we requested to download the forms.
On August 9, 2017, I again engaged the Commission CEO and Commissioner Guliye who had come to the auditorium to monitor the verification process and the challenges of accessing the forms. We yet again requested the commission to [supply] the data in soft copy to enable the verification process to begin. Mr Muhati, the commission’s Director of ICT [suspended from duty and somehow reinstated after the death of the man appointed to act in his place, Mr Chris Musando, days to the election] then promised to [supply] 11,000 Form 34Bs if we could bring a two terabyte external hard disk to the commission to [download] the soft copies for us. We obliged and bought the disk. However, […] it took us another six (6) hours from 0900 HRS to 1500 HRS to receive the first batch of 6,000 Forms 34A. Needless to state, the commission wasn’t able to provide the 11,000 copies as promised. I cannot confirm that they even had them as only 6,000 forms were provided on that day.
On August 10, 2017, the results continued to be displayed and at one point the Commission claimed that all the results being transmitted were okay, and there were no inconsistencies so far noticed. This implied that the same had been verified, which was not the case. My team and I put the commission to task to explain the basis of its claims as there had been very little or no verification taking place.
I therefore requested a meeting with the commission, which the CEO agreed to convene at 0800 HRS the following day. By the end of the day, the commission had only supplied 23,000 Forms 34As and about 50 Forms 34Bs.
After consultations with the Nasa’s deputy chief agent, Ms Ogla Karani, we agreed to write to the commission in order to have a record of our engagements given that at times promises were given that were not fulfilled.
Our attempts to serve the letter on the 1st Respondent were however resisted at first and when the same was eventually received, there was no official response. The commission however agreed to meet us informally. In the meeting, Ms Ogla Karani, the deputy chief agent outlined the various discrepancies and inconsistencies in the results that were streaming on live television and the forms received and which the commission promised to review and respond to appropriately. In the event, the Chairman promised that the commission would only declare results once verification of all Forms34As and Forms 34Bs had arrived and been verified.
On August 11, 2017, security at Bomas was been beefed up and rumuors filled the air that the Commission would declare the results of the presidential election on that day. I thereupon approached the commission to request the remaining Form 34As and was told that there were only 6,000 more Forms 34As, making a sum total of 29,000. Mr Chiloba informed us that the commission was having challenges receiving more forms, with about 11,000-plus forms remaining. By the end of the day, we had received close to 80 Form 34Bs. The chairman once again assured us that he could not make a declaration without all the requisite prescribed documents.
On the same day, [Mr Odinga] and his chief agent went to the national tallying centre at 1500 HRS and met with the commission. He sought the commission’s assurance that all the issues raised by the agents would be addressed and was assured that the commission would follow the law in the transmission, tallying and declaration of the results.
However, so soon after the meeting with the Commission, Ms Lucy Ndungu, the Registrar of Political Parties approached our tallying desk to find out whether those of us present would sign Form 34C [the document containing the national results of the presidential election]. This implied that despite assertions by the Chairman that he was not going to declare unverified results, there was actually a conspiracy to do so. The Registrar of Political Parties could not confirm or deny any of my enquiries in that regard. In the meantime the Commission’s CEO, Mr Chiloba, made it clear that the commission was not able to supply the remaining Forms 34A and that although the chairman had claimed that 288 Form 34Bs had arrived, there were only 108 available at the tallying centre.
At around 2000 HRS, the commission summoned all the agents to a meeting in which the chairman informed us that the commission had received all the Form 34Bs and verified them, and because he had an obligation to inform the agents that he was going to make a declaration, he wanted to know whether ODM/NASA was ready to sign the results. He was however unable to provide the said forms when requested to supply them and insisted that he was going to make the declaration nonetheless.
We thereupon declined to be part of the signing without the verified results. The Nasa chief agent and the other members of our group issued a press statement and left the national tallying centre. I nonetheless continued making informal requests for the remaining forms, to no avail.
On August 14, Ms Ogla Karani formally wrote to the commission requesting for the remaining forms. I personally went to Bomas and met Mr Chiloba, who assured me that the commission could now supply all the Form 34Bs but could still not supply the Form 34As. I witnessed the forms were still being scanned into the system both at Bomas of Kenya and at the IEBC offices at Anniversary Towers.
On 15th August at around 16:30 Pm I received a phone call from a Mr. Abednego Ominde. Ezra chiloba's personal assistant requesting me to go and collect 5,015 scanned copies of form 34A that were now available. During the same hour Ezra Chiloba responding to public pressure and a press conference by the Petitioners on the non-availability of forms 34A and questioning the authenticity of results announced without 10,000 forms 34A and 187 forms 34B, called to ask me to go and collect the 5015 forms 34A. There is still a balance of more than 5,000 forms to be supplied by the commission.
As at August 16, 2017, the Commission is on record confirming unavailability of a substantial number of the said Form 34As and 34Bs, hence calling to question the accuracy and credibility of the results that were declared on the August 11, 2017.
It is accordingly not possible to independently and accurately confirm that the prescribed forms that were manually transmitted to the national tallying centre were, in fact, the forms that were filled in by presiding officers and returning officers in the presence of agents as by law required. Once the integrated electronic electoral system was discarded and/or ignored in favour of the manual system, the results being transmitted lost credibility in law.”
Ends
Affidavit by Ole KinaQuoteKoitamet Ole Kina was one of the agents appointed by the National Super Alliance to watch over the presidential election results at the national tallying centre at the Bomas of Kenya. His statement, sworn in support of the election petition filed at the Supreme Court by Nasa presidential candidate Raila Odinga and his running mate Kalonzo Musyoka, reveals that the elections results portal started transmitting results a mere 15 minutes after voting closed countrywide –a seeming impossibility even for polling stations with very small numbers. He also lists a series of false unfulfilled promises by the IEBC to supply formal documents to support the results being announced and recounts how agents were given the runaround by IEBC. It is a catalogue of the deception and brazen duplicity that characterised how the announcement of the presidential election results was delivered. Mr Ole Kina’s affidavit, below, has been edited for brevity and clarity.
“I arrived at Bomas of Kenya on August 8, 2017 at 1630 HRS to activate my access card. The process took about an hour. During this time, I was seated at the Auditorium chatting with Ms Hamida Kibwana, Mr Oduor Ong’wen and other agents who were also waiting for their cards to be activated. At about 1715 HRS, results started streaming into the IEBC portal.
As soon as the results started streaming, I settled down to follow the process. I soon realized, and my team members agreed, that there was no way we could verify the results on the IEBC portal without either the hard copies of Form 34A or the soft copies that IEBC was receiving in their server. We therefore approached Commissioners Prof Guliye and Roselyn Akombe as well as CEO Ezra Chiloba and requested them to [supply] the Form 34B for purposes of verification of the streaming results.
We waited for their response for about one hour to no avail, hence prompting us to seek an urgent meeting with the commission. The chair, some commissioners and members of the secretariat led by the CEO attended the meeting.
Since the questions being raised related to transmission of results, the Chairman invited the commission’s ICT officers and Saffron consultants to the meeting.
I complained that my team was not able to access Forms 34A or B on the IEBC portal. Prof Guliye asked the consultant to facilitate access to the documents but the Saffron consultant said he couldn’t as there was a problem with the system. According to him a lot of data that was unaccompanied by the image as required had arrived and that we had to wait for the image to upload as soon as the KIEMS [Kenya Integrated Elections Management System] reached a physical location with either 3G or 4G. He further stated that there was also a possibility that this data would not come at all.
A question on whether they could configure the system to pause the data without an image and allow only data with an image that could be verified to come through was raised. The consultant answered that he would require eight (8.) days to do so. When further pushed to then allow our IT [information technology] team to access the system, he asked for six hours to create email addresses. We couldn’t understand why he required six (6) hours for an action that would take 10 minutes. He pleaded for two hours. At the end of the two hours, he [provided] an email address for our team and [authorized] a workstation already created in the main auditorium be used to access the Form 34Bs.
When the IT team (a Mr Walubengo and Joseph Akhenda) embarked on the process, the link provided was not working. In short, my IT team was taken round the whole night and was only able to access one Form 34A on August 9, in the morning. Even then, our credentials were revoked within one hour of granting access when we requested to download the forms.
On August 9, 2017, I again engaged the Commission CEO and Commissioner Guliye who had come to the auditorium to monitor the verification process and the challenges of accessing the forms. We yet again requested the commission to [supply] the data in soft copy to enable the verification process to begin. Mr Muhati, the commission’s Director of ICT [suspended from duty and somehow reinstated after the death of the man appointed to act in his place, Mr Chris Musando, days to the election] then promised to [supply] 11,000 Form 34Bs if we could bring a two terabyte external hard disk to the commission to [download] the soft copies for us. We obliged and bought the disk. However, […] it took us another six (6) hours from 0900 HRS to 1500 HRS to receive the first batch of 6,000 Forms 34A. Needless to state, the commission wasn’t able to provide the 11,000 copies as promised. I cannot confirm that they even had them as only 6,000 forms were provided on that day.
On August 10, 2017, the results continued to be displayed and at one point the Commission claimed that all the results being transmitted were okay, and there were no inconsistencies so far noticed. This implied that the same had been verified, which was not the case. My team and I put the commission to task to explain the basis of its claims as there had been very little or no verification taking place.
I therefore requested a meeting with the commission, which the CEO agreed to convene at 0800 HRS the following day. By the end of the day, the commission had only supplied 23,000 Forms 34As and about 50 Forms 34Bs.
After consultations with the Nasa’s deputy chief agent, Ms Ogla Karani, we agreed to write to the commission in order to have a record of our engagements given that at times promises were given that were not fulfilled.
Our attempts to serve the letter on the 1st Respondent were however resisted at first and when the same was eventually received, there was no official response. The commission however agreed to meet us informally. In the meeting, Ms Ogla Karani, the deputy chief agent outlined the various discrepancies and inconsistencies in the results that were streaming on live television and the forms received and which the commission promised to review and respond to appropriately. In the event, the Chairman promised that the commission would only declare results once verification of all Forms34As and Forms 34Bs had arrived and been verified.
On August 11, 2017, security at Bomas was been beefed up and rumuors filled the air that the Commission would declare the results of the presidential election on that day. I thereupon approached the commission to request the remaining Form 34As and was told that there were only 6,000 more Forms 34As, making a sum total of 29,000. Mr Chiloba informed us that the commission was having challenges receiving more forms, with about 11,000-plus forms remaining. By the end of the day, we had received close to 80 Form 34Bs. The chairman once again assured us that he could not make a declaration without all the requisite prescribed documents.
On the same day, [Mr Odinga] and his chief agent went to the national tallying centre at 1500 HRS and met with the commission. He sought the commission’s assurance that all the issues raised by the agents would be addressed and was assured that the commission would follow the law in the transmission, tallying and declaration of the results.
However, so soon after the meeting with the Commission, Ms Lucy Ndungu, the Registrar of Political Parties approached our tallying desk to find out whether those of us present would sign Form 34C [the document containing the national results of the presidential election]. This implied that despite assertions by the Chairman that he was not going to declare unverified results, there was actually a conspiracy to do so. The Registrar of Political Parties could not confirm or deny any of my enquiries in that regard. In the meantime the Commission’s CEO, Mr Chiloba, made it clear that the commission was not able to supply the remaining Forms 34A and that although the chairman had claimed that 288 Form 34Bs had arrived, there were only 108 available at the tallying centre.
At around 2000 HRS, the commission summoned all the agents to a meeting in which the chairman informed us that the commission had received all the Form 34Bs and verified them, and because he had an obligation to inform the agents that he was going to make a declaration, he wanted to know whether ODM/NASA was ready to sign the results. He was however unable to provide the said forms when requested to supply them and insisted that he was going to make the declaration nonetheless.
We thereupon declined to be part of the signing without the verified results. The Nasa chief agent and the other members of our group issued a press statement and left the national tallying centre. I nonetheless continued making informal requests for the remaining forms, to no avail.
On August 14, Ms Ogla Karani formally wrote to the commission requesting for the remaining forms. I personally went to Bomas and met Mr Chiloba, who assured me that the commission could now supply all the Form 34Bs but could still not supply the Form 34As. I witnessed the forms were still being scanned into the system both at Bomas of Kenya and at the IEBC offices at Anniversary Towers.
On 15th August at around 16:30 Pm I received a phone call from a Mr. Abednego Ominde. Ezra chiloba's personal assistant requesting me to go and collect 5,015 scanned copies of form 34A that were now available. During the same hour Ezra Chiloba responding to public pressure and a press conference by the Petitioners on the non-availability of forms 34A and questioning the authenticity of results announced without 10,000 forms 34A and 187 forms 34B, called to ask me to go and collect the 5015 forms 34A. There is still a balance of more than 5,000 forms to be supplied by the commission.
As at August 16, 2017, the Commission is on record confirming unavailability of a substantial number of the said Form 34As and 34Bs, hence calling to question the accuracy and credibility of the results that were declared on the August 11, 2017.
It is accordingly not possible to independently and accurately confirm that the prescribed forms that were manually transmitted to the national tallying centre were, in fact, the forms that were filled in by presiding officers and returning officers in the presence of agents as by law required. Once the integrated electronic electoral system was discarded and/or ignored in favour of the manual system, the results being transmitted lost credibility in law.”
Ends
NASWA met IEBC Commisioners on Friday afternoon just before the results were announced. I hope they recorded this meeting. Should have been the first thing to leak right after declaration...There is little mentioned of what was agreed before the night marish results showed up in our screens and certainly everything had to be backup by manual forms.The worse the results got the strenuous the demand .I was here and Terminator was asking for evidence... doubting iebc as nightmarish figures flooded randomly as tallying ended..from the on iebc were NASA enemies.
Jubilee had several teams of international hackers in the end they went with the low tech option of feeding IEBC database with Moas numbers. With all IEBC resources what was so hard showing polling station code where the votes were coming from ?
Pretty much everyone with stats 102 knew with such near perfect random reporting it was over for Raila and from there the disbelief turn into frenzy to reinforce it.I personally called it after 50 polling station aware that if first 50 random polling station were report.. nothing would changed..it ended exactly there.
Considering that results are from random polling centres, I do not expect any major change in the percentage scores. Uhuru has clear win! pic.twitter.com/Pt5YE2aYpL
— Mungai Kihanya (@mungaikihanya) August 8, 2017
Pretty much everyone with stats 102 knew with such near perfect random reporting it was over for Raila and from there the disbelief turn into frenzy to reinforce it.I personally called it after 50 polling station aware that if first 50 random polling station were report.. nothing would changed..it ended exactly there.
This phycisist/columnist said as much. Observe the time stamp of his tweet;
I'm pretty certain this will be the counter to the 'constant' 11% gap
Jubilee had several teams of international hackers in the end they went with the low tech option of feeding IEBC database with Moas numbers. With all IEBC resources what was so hard showing polling station code where the votes were coming from ?
The MOAS was fed to the i36 too. I recall some making boisterous "predictions" of the final outcome. now we know why. They already knew the actual results before a single ballot had been cast.
Thieving bastards.
At exactly 5:07 pm, and on live television, Ezra Chiloba said they had already received results from Kajiado County and put on screen
Finally Pundit has revealed that he is just a data entry clerk somewhere with conventional wisdom. I simply can't stand an idiot and one who is LYING
Please kindly look at how "RANDOM" this was.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHmMleEXYAARhLu.png)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHmS1bfXUAAILkX.jpg)
How to Hack an Election
Andrés Sepúlveda rigged elections throughout Latin America for almost a decade. He tells his story for the first time.
By Jordan Robertson, Michael Riley, and Andrew Willis | March 31, 2016
Photographs by Juan Arredondo
From Bloomberg Businessweek
Versión en español
It was just before midnight when Enrique Peña Nieto declared victory as the newly elected president of Mexico. Peña Nieto was a lawyer and a millionaire, from a family of mayors and governors. His wife was a telenovela star. He beamed as he was showered with red, green, and white confetti at the Mexico City headquarters of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, which had ruled for more than 70 years before being forced out in 2000. Returning the party to power on that night in July 2012, Peña Nieto vowed to tame drug violence, fight corruption, and open a more transparent era in Mexican politics.
Two thousand miles away, in an apartment in Bogotá’s upscale Chicó Navarra neighborhood, Andrés Sepúlveda sat before six computer screens. Sepúlveda is Colombian, bricklike, with a shaved head, goatee, and a tattoo of a QR code containing an encryption key on the back of his head. On his nape are the words “</head>” and “<body>” stacked atop each other, dark riffs on coding. He was watching a live feed of Peña Nieto’s victory party, waiting for an official declaration of the results.
Bloomberg Businessweek Cover
Featured in Bloomberg Businessweek, April 4, 2016. Subscribe now.
When Peña Nieto won, Sepúlveda began destroying evidence. He drilled holes in flash drives, hard drives, and cell phones, fried their circuits in a microwave, then broke them to shards with a hammer. He shredded documents and flushed them down the toilet and erased servers in Russia and Ukraine rented anonymously with Bitcoins. He was dismantling what he says was a secret history of one of the dirtiest Latin American campaigns in recent memory.
For eight years, Sepúlveda, now 31, says he traveled the continent rigging major political campaigns. With a budget of $600,000, the Peña Nieto job was by far his most complex. He led a team of hackers that stole campaign strategies, manipulated social media to create false waves of enthusiasm and derision, and installed spyware in opposition offices, all to help Peña Nieto, a right-of-center candidate, eke out a victory. On that July night, he cracked bottle after bottle of Colón Negra beer in celebration. As usual on election night, he was alone.
Sepúlveda’s career began in 2005, and his first jobs were small—mostly defacing campaign websites and breaking into opponents’ donor databases. Within a few years he was assembling teams that spied, stole, and smeared on behalf of presidential campaigns across Latin America. He wasn’t cheap, but his services were extensive. For $12,000 a month, a customer hired a crew that could hack smartphones, spoof and clone Web pages, and send mass e-mails and texts. The premium package, at $20,000 a month, also included a full range of digital interception, attack, decryption, and defense. The jobs were carefully laundered through layers of middlemen and consultants. Sepúlveda says many of the candidates he helped might not even have known about his role; he says he met only a few.
His teams worked on presidential elections in Nicaragua, Panama, Honduras, El Salvador, Colombia, Mexico, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Venezuela. Campaigns mentioned in this story were contacted through former and current spokespeople; none but Mexico’s PRI and the campaign of Guatemala’s National Advancement Party would comment.
As a child, he witnessed the violence of Colombia’s Marxist guerrillas. As an adult, he allied with a right wing emerging across Latin America. He believed his hacking was no more diabolical than the tactics of those he opposed, such as Hugo Chávez and Daniel Ortega.
Many of Sepúlveda’s efforts were unsuccessful, but he has enough wins that he might be able to claim as much influence over the political direction of modern Latin America as anyone in the 21st century. “My job was to do actions of dirty war and psychological operations, black propaganda, rumors—the whole dark side of politics that nobody knows exists but everyone can see,” he says in Spanish, while sitting at a small plastic table in an outdoor courtyard deep within the heavily fortified offices of Colombia’s attorney general’s office. He’s serving 10 years in prison for charges including use of malicious software, conspiracy to commit crime, violation of personal data, and espionage, related to hacking during Colombia’s 2014 presidential election. He has agreed to tell his full story for the first time, hoping to convince the public that he’s rehabilitated—and gather support for a reduced sentence.
Usually, he says, he was on the payroll of Juan José Rendón, a Miami-based political consultant who’s been called the Karl Rove of Latin America. Rendón denies using Sepúlveda for anything illegal, and categorically disputes the account Sepúlveda gave Bloomberg Businessweek of their relationship, but admits knowing him and using him to do website design. “If I talked to him maybe once or twice, it was in a group session about that, about the Web,” he says. “I don’t do illegal stuff at all. There is negative campaigning. They don’t like it—OK. But if it’s legal, I’m gonna do it. I’m not a saint, but I’m not a criminal.” While Sepúlveda’s policy was to destroy all data at the completion of a job, he left some documents with members of his hacking teams and other trusted third parties as a secret “insurance policy.”
Sepúlveda provided Bloomberg Businessweek with what he says are e-mails showing conversations between him, Rendón, and Rendón’s consulting firm concerning hacking and the progress of campaign-related cyber attacks. Rendón says the e-mails are fake. An analysis by an independent computer security firm said a sample of the e-mails they examined appeared authentic. Some of Sepúlveda’s descriptions of his actions match published accounts of events during various election campaigns, but other details couldn’t be independently verified. One person working on the campaign in Mexico, who asked not to be identified out of fear for his safety, substantially confirmed Sepúlveda’s accounts of his and Rendón’s roles in that election.
Sepúlveda says he was offered several political jobs in Spain, which he says he turned down because he was too busy. On the question of whether the U.S. presidential campaign is being tampered with, he is unequivocal. “I’m 100 percent sure it is,” he says.
Do you remember the graphs back in 2013 before the computer system suffered a catastrophic breakdown? This is an enhanced version of that rigging mechanism.
Forget this arguement about the portal, IEBC did not use this electronically submitted results to declare a winner. Find evidence on how form 34c does not agree with form 34b and 34b does not agree with 34a.
Omorlo,
The 10/11% 'constant' gap is derived from the portal. I honestly don't believe anything extracted from the portal will help NASWA's cause.
The reason is simple; the keyed in figures are/were not final. Given the Constituency results are final, National Tallying Center's eole in cooking figures is somewhat diminished. Plus unfortunately we don't have any chronology of how the Constituency results streamed in.
I can predict IEBC's excuse will be, 'the results were provisional.'
Yeah, based on the portal,but was he declared based on the portal?Omorlo,
The 10/11% 'constant' gap is derived from the portal. I honestly don't believe anything extracted from the portal will help NASWA's cause.
The reason is simple; the keyed in figures are/were not final. Given the Constituency results are final, National Tallying Center's eole in cooking figures is somewhat diminished. Plus unfortunately we don't have any chronology of how the Constituency results streamed in.
I can predict IEBC's excuse will be, 'the results were provisional.'
Which makes the"winner" provisional too?
Omorlo,
The 10/11% 'constant' gap is derived from the portal. I honestly don't believe anything extracted from the portal will help NASWA's cause.
The reason is simple; the keyed in figures are/were not final. Given the Constituency results are final, National Tallying Center's eole in cooking figures is somewhat diminished. Plus unfortunately we don't have any chronology of how the Constituency results streamed in.
I can predict IEBC's excuse will be, 'the results were provisional.'
I guess the portal doesn't matter except when it confirms the result. The idea that it was part of making the election transparent, clear and verifiable goes out the window the moment it does not support the process. All said without batting an eyelid.Data entry errors we're anticipated. I shared that Mutula Kilonzo tweet as well as IEBC's to this effect. The figures are good but not error free. Good in the sense that there is little to zero variance with the final results.
I guess the portal doesn't matter except when it confirms the result. The idea that it was part of making the election transparent, clear and verifiable goes out the window the moment it does not support the process. All said without batting an eyelid.Data entry errors we're anticipated. I shared that Mutula Kilonzo tweet as well as IEBC's to this effect. The figures are good but not error free. Good in the sense that there is little to zero variance with the final results.
Forget this arguement about the portal, IEBC did not use this electronically submitted results to declare a winner. Find evidence on how form 34c does not agree with form 34b and 34b does not agree with 34a.
1. Nowhere have I said this in support of the petition.
2. This is a rebuttal of the claim that the results were transmitted "randomly"
3. The portal is supposed to eventually have the accurate results. Already the senate results for Trans Nzioa have been "overturned".
?s=09Press Statement - Update on Elections Preparedness - 4th August 2017
— IEBC (@IEBCKenya) August 5, 2017
Read yesterday at Bomas of Kenya. #WeweNdioKusema #ElectionsKE2017 pic.twitter.com/SWC6sRV747
The joint select Commitee was aware that figures were subject to alterations & or amendments. This impasse in wholly unnecessary.
— Mutula KilonzoJR CBS (@GvnMutula) August 9, 2017
Affidavit by Ole KinaQuoteKoitamet Ole Kina was one of the agents appointed by the National Super Alliance to watch over the presidential election results at the national tallying centre at the Bomas of Kenya. His statement, sworn in support of the election petition filed at the Supreme Court by Nasa presidential candidate Raila Odinga and his running mate Kalonzo Musyoka, reveals that the elections results portal started transmitting results a mere 15 minutes after voting closed countrywide –a seeming impossibility even for polling stations with very small numbers. He also lists a series of false unfulfilled promises by the IEBC to supply formal documents to support the results being announced and recounts how agents were given the runaround by IEBC. It is a catalogue of the deception and brazen duplicity that characterised how the announcement of the presidential election results was delivered. Mr Ole Kina’s affidavit, below, has been edited for brevity and clarity.
“I arrived at Bomas of Kenya on August 8, 2017 at 1630 HRS to activate my access card. The process took about an hour. During this time, I was seated at the Auditorium chatting with Ms Hamida Kibwana, Mr Oduor Ong’wen and other agents who were also waiting for their cards to be activated. At about 1715 HRS, results started streaming into the IEBC portal.
As soon as the results started streaming, I settled down to follow the process. I soon realized, and my team members agreed, that there was no way we could verify the results on the IEBC portal without either the hard copies of Form 34A or the soft copies that IEBC was receiving in their server. We therefore approached Commissioners Prof Guliye and Roselyn Akombe as well as CEO Ezra Chiloba and requested them to [supply] the Form 34B for purposes of verification of the streaming results.
We waited for their response for about one hour to no avail, hence prompting us to seek an urgent meeting with the commission. The chair, some commissioners and members of the secretariat led by the CEO attended the meeting.
Since the questions being raised related to transmission of results, the Chairman invited the commission’s ICT officers and Saffron consultants to the meeting.
I complained that my team was not able to access Forms 34A or B on the IEBC portal. Prof Guliye asked the consultant to facilitate access to the documents but the Saffron consultant said he couldn’t as there was a problem with the system. According to him a lot of data that was unaccompanied by the image as required had arrived and that we had to wait for the image to upload as soon as the KIEMS [Kenya Integrated Elections Management System] reached a physical location with either 3G or 4G. He further stated that there was also a possibility that this data would not come at all.
A question on whether they could configure the system to pause the data without an image and allow only data with an image that could be verified to come through was raised. The consultant answered that he would require eight (8.) days to do so. When further pushed to then allow our IT [information technology] team to access the system, he asked for six hours to create email addresses. We couldn’t understand why he required six (6) hours for an action that would take 10 minutes. He pleaded for two hours. At the end of the two hours, he [provided] an email address for our team and [authorized] a workstation already created in the main auditorium be used to access the Form 34Bs.
When the IT team (a Mr Walubengo and Joseph Akhenda) embarked on the process, the link provided was not working. In short, my IT team was taken round the whole night and was only able to access one Form 34A on August 9, in the morning. Even then, our credentials were revoked within one hour of granting access when we requested to download the forms.
On August 9, 2017, I again engaged the Commission CEO and Commissioner Guliye who had come to the auditorium to monitor the verification process and the challenges of accessing the forms. We yet again requested the commission to [supply] the data in soft copy to enable the verification process to begin. Mr Muhati, the commission’s Director of ICT [suspended from duty and somehow reinstated after the death of the man appointed to act in his place, Mr Chris Musando, days to the election] then promised to [supply] 11,000 Form 34Bs if we could bring a two terabyte external hard disk to the commission to [download] the soft copies for us. We obliged and bought the disk. However, […] it took us another six (6) hours from 0900 HRS to 1500 HRS to receive the first batch of 6,000 Forms 34A. Needless to state, the commission wasn’t able to provide the 11,000 copies as promised. I cannot confirm that they even had them as only 6,000 forms were provided on that day.
On August 10, 2017, the results continued to be displayed and at one point the Commission claimed that all the results being transmitted were okay, and there were no inconsistencies so far noticed. This implied that the same had been verified, which was not the case. My team and I put the commission to task to explain the basis of its claims as there had been very little or no verification taking place.
I therefore requested a meeting with the commission, which the CEO agreed to convene at 0800 HRS the following day. By the end of the day, the commission had only supplied 23,000 Forms 34As and about 50 Forms 34Bs.
After consultations with the Nasa’s deputy chief agent, Ms Ogla Karani, we agreed to write to the commission in order to have a record of our engagements given that at times promises were given that were not fulfilled.
Our attempts to serve the letter on the 1st Respondent were however resisted at first and when the same was eventually received, there was no official response. The commission however agreed to meet us informally. In the meeting, Ms Ogla Karani, the deputy chief agent outlined the various discrepancies and inconsistencies in the results that were streaming on live television and the forms received and which the commission promised to review and respond to appropriately. In the event, the Chairman promised that the commission would only declare results once verification of all Forms34As and Forms 34Bs had arrived and been verified.
On August 11, 2017, security at Bomas was been beefed up and rumuors filled the air that the Commission would declare the results of the presidential election on that day. I thereupon approached the commission to request the remaining Form 34As and was told that there were only 6,000 more Forms 34As, making a sum total of 29,000. Mr Chiloba informed us that the commission was having challenges receiving more forms, with about 11,000-plus forms remaining. By the end of the day, we had received close to 80 Form 34Bs. The chairman once again assured us that he could not make a declaration without all the requisite prescribed documents.
On the same day, [Mr Odinga] and his chief agent went to the national tallying centre at 1500 HRS and met with the commission. He sought the commission’s assurance that all the issues raised by the agents would be addressed and was assured that the commission would follow the law in the transmission, tallying and declaration of the results.
However, so soon after the meeting with the Commission, Ms Lucy Ndungu, the Registrar of Political Parties approached our tallying desk to find out whether those of us present would sign Form 34C [the document containing the national results of the presidential election]. This implied that despite assertions by the Chairman that he was not going to declare unverified results, there was actually a conspiracy to do so. The Registrar of Political Parties could not confirm or deny any of my enquiries in that regard. In the meantime the Commission’s CEO, Mr Chiloba, made it clear that the commission was not able to supply the remaining Forms 34A and that although the chairman had claimed that 288 Form 34Bs had arrived, there were only 108 available at the tallying centre.
At around 2000 HRS, the commission summoned all the agents to a meeting in which the chairman informed us that the commission had received all the Form 34Bs and verified them, and because he had an obligation to inform the agents that he was going to make a declaration, he wanted to know whether ODM/NASA was ready to sign the results. He was however unable to provide the said forms when requested to supply them and insisted that he was going to make the declaration nonetheless.
We thereupon declined to be part of the signing without the verified results. The Nasa chief agent and the other members of our group issued a press statement and left the national tallying centre. I nonetheless continued making informal requests for the remaining forms, to no avail.
On August 14, Ms Ogla Karani formally wrote to the commission requesting for the remaining forms. I personally went to Bomas and met Mr Chiloba, who assured me that the commission could now supply all the Form 34Bs but could still not supply the Form 34As. I witnessed the forms were still being scanned into the system both at Bomas of Kenya and at the IEBC offices at Anniversary Towers.
On 15th August at around 16:30 Pm I received a phone call from a Mr. Abednego Ominde. Ezra chiloba's personal assistant requesting me to go and collect 5,015 scanned copies of form 34A that were now available. During the same hour Ezra Chiloba responding to public pressure and a press conference by the Petitioners on the non-availability of forms 34A and questioning the authenticity of results announced without 10,000 forms 34A and 187 forms 34B, called to ask me to go and collect the 5015 forms 34A. There is still a balance of more than 5,000 forms to be supplied by the commission.
As at August 16, 2017, the Commission is on record confirming unavailability of a substantial number of the said Form 34As and 34Bs, hence calling to question the accuracy and credibility of the results that were declared on the August 11, 2017.
It is accordingly not possible to independently and accurately confirm that the prescribed forms that were manually transmitted to the national tallying centre were, in fact, the forms that were filled in by presiding officers and returning officers in the presence of agents as by law required. Once the integrated electronic electoral system was discarded and/or ignored in favour of the manual system, the results being transmitted lost credibility in law.”
Ends
Thanks for sharing. Hopefully the names in there remain safe. Nobody wants to be involved this situation in any way. It almost reminds me of ICC and witness intimidation, bribery and elimination.
Do you know why Muhati was suspended?
So far IEBC claims they relayed keyed in results from the stations. Is maintain the portal results were random on this account.
Yes the portal results were supposed to be accurate but I think IEBC and the Senate committee anticipated errors.
Look at article number 4 ,Transmission of Results , paragraph 2
Here's Mutula Kilonzo confirming this I think;
I doubt any serious argument can be sustained against anticipated errors.
vookeI will not weary you on back and forth arguments on randomness and the 'constant' gap. I leave it at that.
How long do you intend to recycle this Mutula Kilonzo jr tweet?
That aside: We have two issues:
1. Were the results were transmitted randomly
2. Why was there maintained a steady, unchanging gap between the "winning" candidate and the "losing" candidate?
3. Is 2 (above) the result of 1(above)
4. Upon what evidence did the IEBC base it declaration of results
My response:
1. They may well have been transmitted randomly. If that be the case, then every time the field offices transmitted say 3000 votes for Raila, Uhuru got exactly or near exactly the same. I can assure you that you have a greater chance of winning ALL the major world lotteries before that happens
2. The steady, unchanging gap between the two could only be maintained by a computer algorithm. This was first seen when during testing, it deducted 1 vote from Raila. If they allow the result to move from 99% to 100% you will see wonders. Uhuru would reach over 9M while Raila would get 8M (a different topic).
3. Some IT quack has tried to explain that the randomness caused 2. In fact I wish he had tried the exact opposite. If he had said the IEBC arranged for specific polling stations to transmit at certain times based on the perceived strengths of the candidates, it could have made more sense. Dismiss it as cheap uneducated propaganda
4. The IEBC did not use the electronic results to declare a winner; And did not have all the Form 34B and 34As with 11,000 missing at the time. So my bet is that State House gave them the figures to announce.
I will assume you are raising a genuine concern and respond to you. If I find I am wasting my time, I will promptly switch on the ignore button.
1. You are concerned by the photo because to you Raila and Kalonzo are grandstanding by carrying the "petition" for the media: Here is the response: NASA and indeed anybody who tried to file a petition against Uhuru was subjected to inhuman harassment. One prominent woman was abducted, assaulted and left for dead. She chose not to go public.
Uhuru pulled no punches raiding five locations (three publicized) where NASA lawyers were preparing the petition. A Few hours to the deadline and Uhuru upped the ante, setting up roadblocks and pouring police on the road from Raila's home to the courts. The petition could be impounded and destroyed at any of the places.
It was then made clear that to succeed the principals must be involved. Phone calls were made to all people in NASA who matter and who if injured would generate international headlines to come to Raila's home for the journey to Milimani.
Inside the courts there were still NIS operatives who nearly made off with one bunch of papers containing the real Form 34As and some affidavits.
You may recall that the SCOK banned the submission of evidence out of time. Therefore ALL evidence was to be submitted. There is no room after to file something afterwards.
Raila need not have come to the court. However without him and the principals, Uhuru would not have allowed that petition through. Only the presence of the international press summoned to come see Raila present the petition to the Registrar put a stop to it.
The information we have is that Ahmednassir and others are planning to have it knocked out on grounds that it was filed late.
This is worse than what I read
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Nasa-lawyers-sought-refuge-at-Raila-residence/1056-4063996-vcykn4z/index.html
So it's either this petition has some realistic chance of success, or these are fabrications.
It can't be having chances of success if Judiciary is an appendage of Executive. So I'd say Jubilee guerilla tactics is the best proof of independence of the Judiciary
I know I have asked this before. But so many threads with the same subject. So when can we expect to see the lawyers speaking to the judges about this petition?About threads: For me once a thread is gone to page 3 or more I really think it is wrong to bump it up without good cause. I can do it if the information I neêd to post is highly relevant to that and there are references in the same.
Empedocles
I have since learned (as have almost all lawyers in Kenya) that the rules on evidence were changed so evidence can still be filed upto 6 days to the petition date. I must read them for further comment
I uploaded the rules:
http://omollosview.com/blog/2017/08/21/revised-supreme-court-presidential-election-petition-rules-2017/
Petition for Self Determination pic.twitter.com/6oMLejL4pW
— David Ndii (@DavidNdii) August 21, 2017
Empedocles
I have since learned (as have almost all lawyers in Kenya) that the rules on evidence were changed so evidence can still be filed upto 6 days to the petition date. I must read them for further comment
I uploaded the rules:
http://omollosview.com/blog/2017/08/21/revised-supreme-court-presidential-election-petition-rules-2017/
That was never the point.
Grandstanding, in this case, is because, in my observations on how NASA's acting, they simply don't have the evidence to reach the high threshold of overturning the elections and they know it.
Wanna another clue?Petition for Self Determination pic.twitter.com/6oMLejL4pW
— David Ndii (@DavidNdii) August 21, 2017
That may be so, but it may also just be a reflection of the attitude towards the SCOK. If I were those judges, and I started getting the same harassment NASA lawyers, Civil Society and (as I now believe) IEBC got/are getting, I am not sure I would be brave enough to stick a finger in the eye of the beast that is the state. Even if evidence is against all odds produced and we all see it, it is simply unrealistic to except these few individuals to contradict the powers that be. Not to mention Msando's unresolved case is still fresh in all ours and undoubtedly their minds as well. You'd have to be dumb or saintly to do that.Empedocles
I have since learned (as have almost all lawyers in Kenya) that the rules on evidence were changed so evidence can still be filed upto 6 days to the petition date. I must read them for further comment
I uploaded the rules:
http://omollosview.com/blog/2017/08/21/revised-supreme-court-presidential-election-petition-rules-2017/
That was never the point.
Grandstanding, in this case, is because, in my observations on how NASA's acting, they simply don't have the evidence to reach the high threshold of overturning the elections and they know it.
Wanna another clue?Petition for Self Determination pic.twitter.com/6oMLejL4pW
— David Ndii (@DavidNdii) August 21, 2017
That may be so, but it may also just be a reflection of the attitude towards the SCOK. If I were those judges, and I started getting the same harassment NASA lawyers, Civil Society and (as I now believe) IEBC got/are getting, I am not sure I would be brave enough to stick a finger in the eye of the beast that is the state. Even if evidence is against all odds produced and we all see it, it is simply unrealistic to except these few individuals to contradict the powers that be. Not to mention Msando's unresolved case is still fresh in all ours and undoubtedly their minds as well. You'd have to be dumb or saintly to do that.Empedocles
I have since learned (as have almost all lawyers in Kenya) that the rules on evidence were changed so evidence can still be filed upto 6 days to the petition date. I must read them for further comment
I uploaded the rules:
http://omollosview.com/blog/2017/08/21/revised-supreme-court-presidential-election-petition-rules-2017/
That was never the point.
Grandstanding, in this case, is because, in my observations on how NASA's acting, they simply don't have the evidence to reach the high threshold of overturning the elections and they know it.
Wanna another clue?Petition for Self Determination pic.twitter.com/6oMLejL4pW
— David Ndii (@DavidNdii) August 21, 2017
Agreed on the probable harassment of the SCOK by Jubilee, I would put anything past that psychotic deputy president.That is definitely a reasonable way of reading that. Maybe they are both trying to keep the SCOK from falling into the power of the other using whatever tools they got. Another might be not to presume it's all coordinated. Maybe Dr. Ndii genuinely represents a segment that feels that way. I remember a few days ago I jokingly mused to Robina that I was fantasizing a peaceful cessation where we allowed Uthamaki to continue and those of us who aren't interested can do our own thing. I wasn't serious but it's definitely a real sentiment that I know is out there. Maybe this Ndii petition is just the same and no more. There are many people who arent bothered with this SCOK petition and are perhaps ready to pursue other avenues. This is why I have been basically preaching our need to begin seriously taking nationalism as a real thing. We need to replace tribes some way some how,
So why would Ndii, an NASA insider, play their Trump :D card now, even before the game got underway (i.e. the scrutiny of the evidence)?
The manipulation of NASA supporters is obvious and, indirectly, the SCOK judges by Ndii.
So why would Ndii, an NASA insider, play their Trump :D card now, even before the game got underway (i.e. the scrutiny of the evidence)?
The manipulation of NASA supporters is obvious and, indirectly, the SCOK judges by Ndii.
Agreed on the probable harassment of the SCOK by Jubilee, I would put anything past that psychotic deputy president.That is definitely a reasonable way of reading that. Maybe they are both trying to keep the SCOK from falling into the power of the other using whatever tools they got. Another might be not to presume it's all coordinated. Maybe Dr. Ndii genuinely represents a segment that feels that way. I remember a few days ago I jokingly mused to Robina that I was fantasizing a peaceful cessation where we allowed Uthamaki to continue and those of us who aren't interested can do our own thing. I wasn't serious but it's definitely a real sentiment that I know is out there. Maybe this Ndii petition is just the same and no more. There are many people who arent bothered with this SCOK petition and are perhaps ready to pursue other avenues. This is why I have been basically preaching our need to begin seriously taking nationalism as a real thing. We need to replace tribes some way some how,
So why would Ndii, an NASA insider, play their Trump :D card now, even before the game got underway (i.e. the scrutiny of the evidence)?
The manipulation of NASA supporters is obvious and, indirectly, the SCOK judges by Ndii.
vooke
David Ndii has been an unapologetic secessionist for as long as 2008. He declared that Kenya is a cruel marriage - something that is becoming a meme of sorts - and by that launched his campaign for self determination. His Twitter profile is clearly "secessionist".
How can a matter that predates NASA / CORD be a "preemptive" whatever (some things written here lately remind me of the many
madmen at choo.com).
His is not a NASA campaign or something one can call "blackmail". He does not represent NASA's views on the matter and has never said he does. Both Jubilee and NASA have yet to comment or issue a policy on the matter.
His petition is separate from the NASA Presidential Election Petition. Any attempt to link the two is mischievous and propagandistic. Some idiot misunderstood it and now wants to make it an issue to debate. He is free to approach Ndii on twitter and secure his answers. I guarantee he will respond to any intelligent question as he always does.
Courts cannot be intimidated by petitions or referenda which are by themselves grounded in law. The petition, which if the idiot I have in mind bothered to read (and he did not), clearly states which legal underpinning its relying on. I will probably donate space for them to post it online for online signatures.
My approach would have been to see them launch another referendum campaign. If Jubilee frustrates that then proceed to seek a divorce to allow Kikuyus and their Somali friends including Ahmednasir and Isaack Hassan - their own state.
Petition for Self Determination drafted. To be filed and argued before Africa Commission on Human and Peoples Rights. Kenya start to change
— Ndung'u Wainaina (@NdunguWainaina) August 21, 2017
Boom! And Kenya shall be partitioned into two states. Central Republic and the people's Republic of Kenya. @DavidNdii calls it REVOLUTION pic.twitter.com/shh08UcQEh
— Lord Abraham Mutai (@ItsMutai) August 21, 2017
I do not understand the panic about secession. If it is pursued democratically why not? There are countries that split and went on to prosper separately.Indeed. I think they assume it means civil war or something. But Scotland/Quebec have had several referenda to secede from Britain/Canada. I don't get the impression that Dr, Ndii is asking anyone to take up arms. He is just advocating a peaceful process. At the most it will give some aggrieved people avenue to vent some. It's really not that big a deal.
I think in Kenya GEMA is scared of being ruled by other tribes. The other tribes are tired and afraid of being ruled either by Kikuyus or kalenjin. So it would be best that the Kalenjin and Kikuyu have their own country since at least one of them is not afraid of being ruled by the other.
Tell me iko makosa wapi? Eritreans did not want to be ruled. They are free and happy under their own bloody dictator. Ethiopians stayed on their own under a tribal hegemon.
Indeed. I think they assume it means civil war or something. But Scotland/Quebec have had several referenda to secede from Britain/Canada. I don't get the impression that Dr, Ndii is asking anyone to take up arms. He is just advocating a peaceful process. At the most it will give some aggrieved people avenue to vent some. It's really not that big a deal.
I do not understand the panic about secession. If it is pursued democratically why not? There are countries that split and went on to prosper separately.Indeed. I think they assume it means civil war or something. But Scotland/Quebec have had several referenda to secede from Britain/Canada. I don't get the impression that Dr, Ndii is asking anyone to take up arms. He is just advocating a peaceful process. At the most it will give some aggrieved people avenue to vent some. It's really not that big a deal.
I think in Kenya GEMA is scared of being ruled by other tribes. The other tribes are tired and afraid of being ruled either by Kikuyus or kalenjin. So it would be best that the Kalenjin and Kikuyu have their own country since at least one of them is not afraid of being ruled by the other.
Tell me iko makosa wapi? Eritreans did not want to be ruled. They are free and happy under their own bloody dictator. Ethiopians stayed on their own under a tribal hegemon.
Totally agree. I think some people just feel it'd be best to start building a nation fresh rather than reforming one in the clutches of a mafia. But this secession idea is not a genuine threat, these nipate jubilants just like to fret over nothing. Let Dr. Ndii vent, kwani iko nini...I do not understand the panic about secession. If it is pursued democratically why not? There are countries that split and went on to prosper separately.Indeed. I think they assume it means civil war or something. But Scotland/Quebec have had several referenda to secede from Britain/Canada. I don't get the impression that Dr, Ndii is asking anyone to take up arms. He is just advocating a peaceful process. At the most it will give some aggrieved people avenue to vent some. It's really not that big a deal.
I think in Kenya GEMA is scared of being ruled by other tribes. The other tribes are tired and afraid of being ruled either by Kikuyus or kalenjin. So it would be best that the Kalenjin and Kikuyu have their own country since at least one of them is not afraid of being ruled by the other.
Tell me iko makosa wapi? Eritreans did not want to be ruled. They are free and happy under their own bloody dictator. Ethiopians stayed on their own under a tribal hegemon.
I would support it if the proponents put down some specifics of the values of the new country, not just the borders. If you are seceding and carrying with you the same values of the state you leaving, you are going nowhere.