IEBC Suffers a Debilitating Defeat At Appeals Court

[Omollo]

• Tweet

The Appeals court has declined the appeal saying one person cannot have the power  to alter results.

We find no fault in the ruling by the High court.... provisions are inconsistent. Appeal dismissed

[Nefertiti]

Good. IEBC Chair's job will be to sum up the figures... along with the media houses and observers. A step in the right direction that makes cooking harder.

I see NASA winning on the Al Ghurair business... as wrong-footed Chebukati smarts from more humble pie... so we can have proper elections where everyone is confident.

[RV Pundit]

So from what I am hearing.
1) They said final results are those announced at polling stations.
2) Then they are transmitted through all levels to Chebukati.

IEBC basically cannot alter any mistakes done at that lower level. It totally emasculate the commission. They should appeal this.

[Omollo]

First the ROs are part and parcel of the commission. It is still the commission declaring the results at the Constituency.

Secondly what power do you want Chebukati to have and for what purpose?

So from what I am hearing.
1) They said final results are those announced at polling stations.
2) Then they are transmitted through all levels to Chebukati.

IEBC basically cannot alter any mistakes done at that lower level. It totally emasculate the commission. They should appeal this.

So from what I am hearing.
1) They said final results are those announced at polling stations.
2) Then they are transmitted through all levels to Chebukati.

IEBC basically cannot alter any mistakes done at that lower level. It totally emasculate the commission. They should appeal this.

[Globalcitizen12]

Good ruling..now NASA should hold on reporting it's strongholds until jubilee does. They should have billions to buy Ros and agents

[RV Pundit]

I want the current procedure left. IEBC job is to conduct free and fair election. We should let them do that. Right now they have procedure that works. At every level - the upper level checks the works of lower level - and make modification if need be. All this is documented and all forms submitted to Chebukati. RO should be able to verify and alter PO work if he discover there are errors. Chebukati should do the same on ROs work. If you have any issue - with any alteration - there is paper trail on what was altered and why.

Now you're saying POs can do shiet and that is it. What purpose of chebukati and IEBC. Why not let every polling station now report whatever they want. POs & agents are local folks in that polling station. They now have no accountability.

First the ROs are part and parcel of the commission. It is still the commission declaring the results at the Constituency.

Secondly what power do you want Chebukati to have and for what purpose?

[RV Pundit]

choo.com really misses their resident fool.

Good ruling..now NASA should hold on reporting it's strongholds until jubilee does. They should have billions to buy Ros and agents

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

The Appeals court has declined the appeal saying one person cannot have the power  to alter results.

We find no fault in the ruling by the High court.... provisions are inconsistent. Appeal dismissed

A link to the ruling would be nice.  These should be on the court's website the minute the judges are done.

That said, denying Chebukati the ability to decide a polling station's total is good for integrity.  A result once announced ought to be final.  Trust the ROs to do their job.

If ROs are so incompetent that they can't do class 2 arithmetic and end up with 10,000% turnout, SCOK should have little trouble deciding if that changes the outcome.

[Omollo]

I am waiting for the judgement to read because the heavy accent usually gets the better of me. Kenyan scholars lack verbal linguistic refinement.

The IEBC committed one huge error when it quickly gazetted new rules in an attempt to beat the High Court ruling and retain its powers. I suspect it is Issack Hassan and that shyster from mandera - Abdi Kadir -  who advised. This seemed to infuriate the Appeals Court more than anything else.

I want the current procedure left. IEBC job is to conduct free and fair election. We should let them do that. Right now they have procedure that works. At every level - the upper level checks the works of lower level - and make modification if need be. All this is documented and all forms submitted to Chebukati. RO should be able to verify and alter PO work if he discover there are errors. Chebukati should do the same on ROs work. If you have any issue - with any alteration - there is paper trail on what was altered and why.

Now you're saying POs can do shiet and that is it. What purpose of chebukati and IEBC. Why not let every polling station now report whatever they want. POs & agents are local folks in that polling station. They now have no accountability.

First the ROs are part and parcel of the commission. It is still the commission declaring the results at the Constituency.

Secondly what power do you want Chebukati to have and for what purpose?

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Good. IEBC Chair's job will be to sum up the figures... along with the media houses and observers. A step in the right direction that makes cooking harder.

I see NASA winning on the Al Ghurair business... as wrong-footed Chebukati smarts from more humble pie... so we can have proper elections where everyone is confident.

Chebukati seems to be a very busy guy.  He has enough work as is.

[Nefertiti]

Chebukati seems to be a very busy guy.  He has enough work as is.

Likely he has a dozen aides, secretaries and lawyers - even shysters - so expect to see him at the Supreme Court. Where he will claim to be short of time while wasting more time there.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Chebukati seems to be a very busy guy.  He has enough work as is.

Likely he has a dozen aides, secretaries and lawyers - even shysters - so expect to see him at the Supreme Court. Where he will claim to be short of time while wasting more time there.

SCOK should refuse to even entertain him.  He has a lot on his hands.

If SCOK were act on this one, that could be a hint of how they might behave in case of a petition.

[RV Pundit]

This is part of the main argument. The high court & court of appeal don't even know what they are dealing with it here.They've never dealt with presidential elections - don't know what works or what doesn't. Whatever they are attempting to cure is hypothetical to them. They should restrict themselves to elections they understands - MP- Governor.

They should not have said anything regard matters PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS.

The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes relating to the elections to the office of President arising under Article 140 of the Constitution.

IEBC have to appeal this - so next time there SCOK will be asking IEBC questions - they will have made clear the presidential election procedures are kosher or not.

SCOK should refuse to even entertain him.  He has a lot on his hands.

If SCOK were act on this one, that could be a hint of how they might behave in case of a petition.

[Kichwa]

The courts job is interpret the law and apply it to the facts.  This case was a no-brainer.  RO's at the constituency level are part of the commission and there is really no need for their tally not to be final.  IEBC was given the opportunity to explain to the court to exactly and under what circumstances they may legitimately change the RO's figures but they could not.  Institutions like IEBC cannot be given blanket powers.  Their powers are limited to serve a certain clearly articulable public purpose.  When IEBC can articulate exactly why the tally at the constituency level should not be final (no convoluted generalized arguments) then they can come back to court and make that argument with evidence.  This process is constantly evolving and we should take a long term view of it and not act as if August 8, 2017 is the end of the world.

This is part of the main argument. The high court & court of appeal don't even know what they are dealing with it here.They've never dealt with presidential elections - don't know what works or what doesn't. Whatever they are attempting to cure is hypothetical to them. They should restrict themselves to elections they understands - MP- Governor.

They should not have said anything regard matters PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS.

The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes relating to the elections to the office of President arising under Article 140 of the Constitution.

IEBC have to appeal this - so next time there SCOK will be asking IEBC questions - they will have made clear the presidential election procedures are kosher or not.

SCOK should refuse to even entertain him.  He has a lot on his hands.

If SCOK were act on this one, that could be a hint of how they might behave in case of a petition.

[RV Pundit]

IEBC knows best. Unless you mean IEBC are compromised. This not Jubilee. If you tell IEBC that you don't trust Chebukati but trust the guys he hires..what exactly are you saying? If Chebukati wants to steal..he will hire ROs or POs who will work for him.

This to is from frying pan direct to fire...which explain why NASA has also gone to court wanting IEBC to consult them on who they hire as ROs. Apart from wanting consulted on ballots papers.

Maybe we should drop independent and replace it with Impotent Election Board of Kenya - coz that seem the intention of NASA.

The courts job is interpret the law and apply it to the facts.  This case was a no-brainer.  RO's at the constituency level are part of the commission and there is really no need for their tally not to be final.  IEBC was given the opportunity to explain to the court to exactly and under what circumstances they may legitimately change the RO's figures but they could not.  Institutions like IEBC cannot be given blanket powers.  Their powers are limited to serve a certain clearly articulable public purpose.  When IEBC can articulate exactly why the tally at the constituency level should not be final (no convoluted generalized arguments) then they can come back to court and make that argument with evidence.  This process is constantly evolving and we should take a long term view of it and not act as if August 8, 2017 is the end of the world.

[Kichwa]

Independent In IEBC does not mean 'above the law'. IEBC is  created by the law  and each and everyone of its mandates is reviewable by the courts if there is a disagreement.  A case in point is todays ruling where IEBC believed that its chairman was the RO for presidential elections and therefore must give the final tally.  Maina Kiai and other Kenyans disagreed and took them to court.  The court listened to the legal arguments from both sides and ruled that the framers intended for the constituency tallies to be final.  IEBC can appeal if they are not persuaded by this courts ruling or they can move on.  This does not mean that if things do not work properly in this election or the next election, IEBC cannot go to court again on the same matter and proffer new evidence and arguments of why its chairman should be the only RO for presidential elections.

IEBC knows best. Unless you mean IEBC are compromised. This not Jubilee. If you tell IEBC that you don't trust Chebukati but trust the guys he hires..what exactly are you saying? If Chebukati wants to steal..he will hire ROs or POs who will work for him.

This to is from frying pan direct to fire...which explain why NASA has also gone to court wanting IEBC to consult them on who they hire as ROs. Apart from wanting consulted on ballots papers.

Maybe we should drop independent and replace it with Impotent Election Board of Kenya - coz that seem the intention of NASA.

The courts job is interpret the law and apply it to the facts.  This case was a no-brainer.  RO's at the constituency level are part of the commission and there is really no need for their tally not to be final.  IEBC was given the opportunity to explain to the court to exactly and under what circumstances they may legitimately change the RO's figures but they could not.  Institutions like IEBC cannot be given blanket powers.  Their powers are limited to serve a certain clearly articulable public purpose.  When IEBC can articulate exactly why the tally at the constituency level should not be final (no convoluted generalized arguments) then they can come back to court and make that argument with evidence.  This process is constantly evolving and we should take a long term view of it and not act as if August 8, 2017 is the end of the world.

[RV Pundit]

Judiciary should not impair IEBC unless Maina Kiai can show how IEBC have altered votes to his detriment. There has been no such finding. As far as presidential election went - SCOK found no such evidence. I am hoping this end at Supreme court and we get sober judges to really go behind the legalese and realize IEBC is constitutional body mandated to conduct election - including developing their own internal procedures and rules. You can go to court based on fear - that xyz will abuse the law.

Independent In IEBC does not mean 'above the law'. IEBC is  created by the law  and each and everyone of its mandates is reviewable by the courts if there is a disagreement.  A case in point is todays ruling where IEBC believed that its chairman was the RO for presidential elections and therefore must give the final tally.  Maina Kiai and other Kenyans disagreed and took them to court.  The court listened to the legal arguments from both sides and ruled that the framers intended for the constituency tallies to be final.  IEBC can appeal if they are not persuaded by this courts ruling or they can move on.  This does not mean that if things do not work properly in this election or the next election, IEBC cannot go to court again on the same matter and proffer new evidence and arguments of why its chairman should be the only RO for presidential elections.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

This is part of the main argument. The high court & court of appeal don't even know what they are dealing with it here.They've never dealt with presidential elections - don't know what works or what doesn't. Whatever they are attempting to cure is hypothetical to them. They should restrict themselves to elections they understands - MP- Governor.

They should not have said anything regard matters PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS.

The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes relating to the elections to the office of President arising under Article 140 of the Constitution.

IEBC have to appeal this - so next time there SCOK will be asking IEBC questions - they will have made clear the presidential election procedures are kosher or not.

SCOK should refuse to even entertain him.  He has a lot on his hands.

If SCOK were act on this one, that could be a hint of how they might behave in case of a petition.

It's likely a matter of interpretation.  Maybe they consider election disputes to mean post election petitions.  It is an argument that was likely made and seems plain enough.  SCOK has sole jurisdiction on those cases.   

Also I noticed that once the mortal amicus jumped into the fray on IEBCs side, Jubilee was respresented in this case.

[RV Pundit]

So in few words SCOK need to hear this and rule on it now. Otherwise it's too late in petition. If this was wrong decision - then it could mean repeating the election - which is damn expensive - we are going to spend enough to build Thika SuperHighway.

It's likely a matter of interpretation.  Maybe they consider election disputes to mean post election petitions.  It is an argument that was likely made and seems plain enough.  SCOK has sole jurisdiction on those cases.   

Also I noticed that once the mortal amicus jumped into the fray on IEBCs side, Jubilee was respresented in this case.

[Kichwa]

Supreme court has original jurisdiction over matters of presidential election dispute.  This is NOT.  This  matter was never brought as a dispute of the 2013 elections but as an interpretation of the law going forward. I think both sides had enough time to make their best arguments and Maina won. Hassan's IEBC had misinterpreted the law and I am glad Maina Kiai caught it. If this was an issue of  jurisdiction, IEBC lawyers would have argued it at the inception of this law suit in a motion dismiss which I am sure they must have filed as it is routinely done by respondents in such lawsuits. Jurisdiction matters are the ABC's of litigation and are dispensed with much earlier in the lawsuit.

Judiciary should not impair IEBC unless Maina Kiai can show how IEBC have altered votes to his detriment. There has been no such finding. As far as presidential election went - SCOK found no such evidence. I am hoping this end at Supreme court and we get sober judges to really go behind the legalese and realize IEBC is constitutional body mandated to conduct election - including developing their own internal procedures and rules. You can go to court based on fear - that xyz will abuse the law.

Independent In IEBC does not mean 'above the law'. IEBC is  created by the law  and each and everyone of its mandates is reviewable by the courts if there is a disagreement.  A case in point is todays ruling where IEBC believed that its chairman was the RO for presidential elections and therefore must give the final tally.  Maina Kiai and other Kenyans disagreed and took them to court.  The court listened to the legal arguments from both sides and ruled that the framers intended for the constituency tallies to be final.  IEBC can appeal if they are not persuaded by this courts ruling or they can move on.  This does not mean that if things do not work properly in this election or the next election, IEBC cannot go to court again on the same matter and proffer new evidence and arguments of why its chairman should be the only RO for presidential elections.