Nipate

Forum => Kenya Discussion => Topic started by: Kichwa on September 04, 2017, 07:33:00 PM

Title: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kichwa on September 04, 2017, 07:33:00 PM
Anybody knows why other presidential candidates were locked out.  I hope Chebukati has a strong legal basis to do so otherwise he is just inviting another time wasting law suit.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 04, 2017, 07:37:25 PM
Anybody knows why other presidential candidates were locked out.  I hope Chebukati has a strong legal basis to do so otherwise he is just inviting another time wasting law suit.
Why the HELL would he do that? If true, evidence of this before a court tomorrow should yield tangible results in my very HUMBLE opinion. I mean we've gone past pretenses here and straight into "mtado?" territory....
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants on September 04, 2017, 07:39:03 PM
I am not sure what this is about?  Is there a link I am missing somewhere?

Never mind.  If this goes to court, Chebukati will be forced to allow other candidates.  At a minimum those candidates that ran in the nullified election.

That aside, it's not clear what Ekuru Aukot hopes to accomplish by running.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: RV Pundit on September 04, 2017, 07:44:38 PM
I think re-run is for all candidates.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: patel on September 04, 2017, 07:57:17 PM
Scok has not released full ruling and Chebukati is busy trying to organize rerun. We still don't have full report on servers,  we do not know who gave chirchir Iebc servers access.  We do not know who was logging in as Chebukati. ...at this point NASA through its lawyer they can even hire miguna should come out and say until what went wrong with iebc is fixed we will not take part in those election because iebc is begging for chaos and loss of life.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 04, 2017, 08:00:14 PM
Scok has not released full ruling and Chebukati is busy trying to organize rerun. We still don't have full report on servers,  we do not know who gave chirchir Iebc servers access.  We do not know who was logging in as Chebukati. ...at this point NASA through its lawyer they can even hire miguna should come out and say until what went wrong with iebc is fixed we will not take part in those election because iebc is begging for chaos and loss of life.
100% agreed. Look, we already know what people involved are capable of. No point in legitimizing it.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants on September 04, 2017, 08:04:17 PM
Scok has not released full ruling and Chebukati is busy trying to organize rerun. We still don't have full report on servers,  we do not know who gave chirchir Iebc servers access.  We do not know who was logging in as Chebukati. ...at this point NASA through its lawyer they can even hire miguna should come out and say until what went wrong with iebc is fixed we will not take part in those election because iebc is begging for chaos and loss of life.
100% agreed. Look, we already know what people involved are capable of. No point in legitimizing it.

Yep.  At a minimum they should wait until the SCOK explains what went wrong.  Instead they are going about creating potential new issues, putting the little legitimacy they have left at risk.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 04, 2017, 08:11:35 PM
I am not sure what this is about?  Is there a link I am missing somewhere?

Never mind.  If this goes to court, Chebukati will be forced to allow other candidates.  At a minimum those candidates that ran in the nullified election.

That aside, it's not clear what Ekuru Aukot hopes to accomplish by running.
Oh, so NASA was involved? I thought the claim was that they met Jubilee alone.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants on September 04, 2017, 08:14:07 PM
I am not sure what this is about?  Is there a link I am missing somewhere?

Never mind.  If this goes to court, Chebukati will be forced to allow other candidates.  At a minimum those candidates that ran in the nullified election.

That aside, it's not clear what Ekuru Aukot hopes to accomplish by running.
Oh, so NASA was involved? I thought the claim was that they met Jubilee alone.

Yes.  It looks like IEBC is treating all the other parties as irrelevant.  I mean these guys paid like a million bucks to run.  So there is probably going to be some court cases and reversals.  I prefer the other parties to stay out.  But it has to be through a legal process.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 04, 2017, 08:16:22 PM
I am not sure what this is about?  Is there a link I am missing somewhere?

Never mind.  If this goes to court, Chebukati will be forced to allow other candidates.  At a minimum those candidates that ran in the nullified election.

That aside, it's not clear what Ekuru Aukot hopes to accomplish by running.
Oh, so NASA was involved? I thought the claim was that they met Jubilee alone.

Yes.  It looks like IEBC is treating all the other parties as irrelevant.  I mean these guys paid like a million bucks to run.  So there is probably going to be some court cases and reversals.  I prefer the other parties to stay out.  But it has to be through a legal process.
Yes, it's a fresh election. Not a round two. I think Chebukati is confusing those two.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Omollo on September 04, 2017, 08:32:11 PM
Jubilee is afraid Raila will tosha someone else win and then undertake constitutional changes to institute Parliamentary democracy and dump the executive presidency.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kichwa on September 04, 2017, 08:36:29 PM
could it be because they conceded and did not challenge.  I am sure he consulted with his lawyers.  I cannot wait for the legal explanation but I do not think he is confusing a re-run from new elections.


I am not sure what this is about?  Is there a link I am missing somewhere?

Never mind.  If this goes to court, Chebukati will be forced to allow other candidates.  At a minimum those candidates that ran in the nullified election.

That aside, it's not clear what Ekuru Aukot hopes to accomplish by running.
Oh, so NASA was involved? I thought the claim was that they met Jubilee alone.

Yes.  It looks like IEBC is treating all the other parties as irrelevant.  I mean these guys paid like a million bucks to run.  So there is probably going to be some court cases and reversals.  I prefer the other parties to stay out.  But it has to be through a legal process.
Yes, it's a fresh election. Not a round two. I think Chebukati is confusing those two.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 04, 2017, 08:40:30 PM
could it be because they conceded and did not challenge.  I am sure he consulted with his lawyers.  I cannot wait for the legal explanation but I do not think he is confusing a re-run from new elections.


I am not sure what this is about?  Is there a link I am missing somewhere?

Never mind.  If this goes to court, Chebukati will be forced to allow other candidates.  At a minimum those candidates that ran in the nullified election.

That aside, it's not clear what Ekuru Aukot hopes to accomplish by running.
Oh, so NASA was involved? I thought the claim was that they met Jubilee alone.

Yes.  It looks like IEBC is treating all the other parties as irrelevant.  I mean these guys paid like a million bucks to run.  So there is probably going to be some court cases and reversals.  I prefer the other parties to stay out.  But it has to be through a legal process.
Yes, it's a fresh election. Not a round two. I think Chebukati is confusing those two.
What would concessions have to do with anything? IEBC is not there to pull an "estoppel" on anyone. Concessions mean the individuals believed the elections were free and fair. The SCOK has now corrected that misperception. So how or why should this affect anyone? I don't get it. This concession argument makes no sense to me. The law was different when all these concessions were made.

Furthermore, even if they were bound to their concession, this is a different election. I can think of no reason why rights to participate in it should be tied to what a candidate did vis-a-vis an old and dead election.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Higgins the genius on September 04, 2017, 09:23:36 PM
Based on 2013 Supreme Court Ruling
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: yulemsee on September 04, 2017, 10:06:37 PM
Jubilee is afraid Raila will tosha someone else win and then undertake constitutional changes to institute Parliamentary democracy and dump the executive presidency.
In which paliament, the one that jubilee controls?
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: vooke on September 04, 2017, 10:11:35 PM
KM,
Others were locked out supposedly on the basis of 2013 ruling. It was held that if other candidates never petitioned against the declaration they are deemed to have conceded or something. But I hear Aukot is going to court. Gives him another excuse to grace our tvs. Negro is a socialite I swear
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 04, 2017, 10:13:06 PM
Thanks Higgins. Wow! So its the 2013 decision. Everything in me disagrees with that reasoning. If the court found that the elections were not properly conducted per the law so that it was invalid as it now has, why should other candidates be barred from participating in one that is properly conducted?

EDIT: Actually, no: It apparently is a constitutional provision, not only the 2013 decision. It's basically a run-off.  Perhaps it was meant to ensure we wouldn't have three elections in one year. But it doesn't make sense to me. Shouldn't a credible election be the interests of everyone?

Based on 2013 Supreme Court Ruling
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: MOON Ki on September 04, 2017, 10:31:24 PM
Thanks Higgins. Wow! So its the 2013 decision. Everything in me disagrees with that reasoning. If the court found that the elections were not properly conducted per the law so that it was invalid as it now has, why should other candidates be barred from participating in one that is properly conducted?

EDIT: Actually, no: It apparently is a constitutional provision, not only the 2013 decision. It's basically a run-off.  Perhaps it was meant to ensure we wouldn't have three elections in one year. But it doesn't make sense to me. Shouldn't a credible election be the interests of everyone?

I'm not entirely sure about that one.   To my mind, your original question is worth debating.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 04, 2017, 10:38:22 PM
Thanks Higgins. Wow! So its the 2013 decision. Everything in me disagrees with that reasoning. If the court found that the elections were not properly conducted per the law so that it was invalid as it now has, why should other candidates be barred from participating in one that is properly conducted?

EDIT: Actually, no: It apparently is a constitutional provision, not only the 2013 decision. It's basically a run-off.  Perhaps it was meant to ensure we wouldn't have three elections in one year. But it doesn't make sense to me. Shouldn't a credible election be the interests of everyone?

I'm not entirely sure about that one.   To my mind, your original question is worth debating.
I am thinking of their reconciling of the meaning of "fresh" elections in the constitution. I didn't even realize there was a whole debate about that in 2013. I'm gonna re-read the provisions for myself absent the SCOK interpretation and see if I can come up with a different way to understand that term and how it has been used.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: MOON Ki on September 04, 2017, 10:40:52 PM
I am thinking of their reconciling of the meaning of "fresh" elections in the constitution. I didn't even realize there was a whole debate about that in 2013. I'm gonna re-read the provisions for myself absent the SCOK interpretation and see if I can come up with a different way to understand that term and how it has been used.

I'll be interested to see what you come up with.    Off the top of my head ... I can't recall anything in the relevant parts of the Constitution that would easily lead to "lock out those people who didn't complain".
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: patel on September 04, 2017, 10:45:44 PM
If that's the case ekuru Akot and Wainaina were enjoined in NASA petition.  All Avenue of kicking jubilee out should be explored including tosharing someone else.   
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Higgins the genius on September 04, 2017, 11:12:54 PM
Will Aukot challenge it at Supreme Court or what?  Lower cannot overrule the Supreme Court
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Kadame7 on September 05, 2017, 01:15:00 AM
Ok, got home, looked at them....and....OMG!!!

People, look at those sections by themselves and then go back and re-read the court's reasoning and tell me I'm court-bashing when I say this interpretation is entirely imaginary and truly ASININE. The court basically is reinventing the simple, natural meaning of the word "fresh" used for the invalidation scenario to make up a whole bunch of restrictions that don't exist in that term at all. It seems to have done so by mixing up the word "fresh" in the provision for no-round-one winner (which provides for no. 1 and 2); with its use in the bit on an invalidated election. Please read the two sections by themselves without assuming anything and tell me how in the world these six people (to quote Uhuru! :D) decided that "fresh" meant "petitioners only"???? or implies anything about a no. 2 :o

One paragraph says that the fresh election is essentially a repeat of the invalidated one so that there's no need for the nomination stage. That seems a reasonable enough interpretation. And then from this the court inexplicably says that in addition, among those who participated in the first election, only those who petitioned the court can participate in this repeat exercise.  There is nothing remotely implying this anywhere except what the court has basically invented and injected into "fresh". So while the court should have answered "how fresh" the new elections should be, deciding between these two reasonable interpretations: either with potentially brand new candidates or just a repeat of the bangled exercise with the same set of candidates, the court jumped from all this and added something not in any way implied by "fresh elections": petitioners only!!!!  :o :o :o The court seems to have confused itself by mixing up the use of fresh in those two different contexts. That's the only explanation I can think of for bringing up a no. 2 in the event of invalidation. (And if we are to be logical here, how could there be a no. 2 in a nullified exercise?)

What was up with that bunch? Please look at those provisions and tell me if you would ever think of "petitioners only" or "person with the second most votes" from the term "fresh elections". Or was the court using the drafting history of those provisions to infer what what was intended there when it was crafted (and didn't quote it)? I doubt that was the intention behind it because it seems a simple sub-section making that clear would have been simple enough rather than this convoluted reasoning...But I don't get where the "petitioners only" came from with "fresh elections". Amazing. Wonder whether this was another "political decision"?  8) :D

On the bright side, I think everyone on nipate is qualified to be a judge in Kenya's high courts as everyone here reasons TONNES better than this when defending their arguments.  :D
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: MOON Ki on September 05, 2017, 02:15:03 AM
Will Aukot challenge it at Supreme Court or what?  Lower cannot overrule the Supreme Court

The SC may be asked to review its own decision. Also, its composition has changed.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: RV Pundit on September 05, 2017, 02:17:04 AM
In any case Aukot had no value. He should let us have re-run of Odinga and Uhuru - so we can close this sad chapter of Raila Odinga with finality. SC argument that re-run is btw two candidates doesn't make much sense - what if petitioner is non-candidate.
Title: Re: Why did Chebukati lock other candidates out
Post by: Nefertiti on September 05, 2017, 02:53:30 AM
The ruling says if the petitioner is a non-candidate then all the candidates are allowed to run.

In any case Aukot had no value. He should let us have re-run of Odinga and Uhuru - so we can close this sad chapter of Raila Odinga with finality. SC argument that re-run is btw two candidates doesn't make much sense - what if petitioner is non-candidate.