IEBC Suffers a Debilitating Defeat At Appeals Court

[Kichwa]

SCOK can only hear this case if IEBC appeals.  I do not think IEBC is  going to appeal because they will not only lose, but they will lose face too.

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.

[Georgesoros]

I dont understand why IEBC did not want to give authority at constituency level....
All along i thought that constituencies figures were final pending recounting, if need be.
Last elections IEBC manipulated data to add their own figures and thats why I dont trust them.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-23/kenyan-court-rules-presidential-votes-can-be-declared-at-station

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I dont understand why IEBC did not want to give authority at constituency level....
All along i thought that constituencies figures were final pending recounting, if need be.
Last elections IEBC manipulated data to add their own figures and thats why I dont trust them.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-23/kenyan-court-rules-presidential-votes-can-be-declared-at-station

It's habit.  They have always treated those results as provisional for God knows why.  The electronic transmission bit, is an attempt to ensure that these results do not change - but it has been shown to fail at the most inconvenient(or convenient) time.  And yet, somehow, Chebukati believes he is allowed to change these tallies.  He needs to go after this election.

[Omollo]

SCOK can only hear this case if IEBC appeals.  I do not think IEBC is  going to appeal because they will not only lose, but they will lose face too

The SC court can hear the matter if someone goes to it with the case. So far we have unanimous decisions from the two lower courts. That is a total of six or seven judges have pronounced themselves on it. So it will be interesting to see them deny their previous positions especially in Shabhal vs Joho.

That said, if you do a search you will find that I stated that the Appeals Court will basically agree with the High court. That Jubilee knows this because the judges hearing the appeal are seasoned and not easy to intimidate. So their respite lies at the SC where Njoki Ndung'u is waiting for the file at the gate - like she did in the Rawal case.

My take is that if you have :
1. Maraga,
2. Njoki,
3. Ojwang and

for Jubilee,

The new judge Mwilu is unknown.

5. Ibrahim
6. Smokin Wanjala
7. Lenaola

But if the case goes to the SC and they rule against the High Court, then be sure NASA will not step before that court and if it wins will disband it.

[Omollo]

Isaack Hassan has done a great disservice to this country. Him together with Abdikadir Mohammed are responsible for a lot of bad things and I pray they eventually pay for it one way or another. They are responsible for this.

The whole idea of the IEBC citing "dishonest" ROs to allow the power to alter results to be given to Chebukati is laughable. I was pleased when the judges found it equally strange and reminded Chebukati that it is his employees he is talking about! They reminded him that ROs are part and parcel of the IEBC and not a separate external entity.

To answer your question the constitution is very clear on that. However Uthamaki moved an amendment that undermined the provisions of the constitution. For some reason CORD had overlooked it. Maina Kiai discovered it and went to court to obtain a declaration. He did.

Hassan and Abdikadir specialized in using the Interim result, subject to confirmation and all manner of tricks to doctor results.

Now what we need are 290 mobile telephone jammers.

I dont understand why IEBC did not want to give authority at constituency level....
All along i thought that constituencies figures were final pending recounting, if need be.
Last elections IEBC manipulated data to add their own figures and thats why I dont trust them.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-23/kenyan-court-rules-presidential-votes-can-be-declared-at-station

[RV Pundit]

If IEBC don't appeal they would have abdicated their responsibility and eventually if this goes to SCOK as petition; they will be told why they didn't appeal to SCOK. This has to go to SCOK. That is IEBC main contention. SCOK have original jurisdiction in such matters.

[Omollo]

If IEBC don't appeal they would have abdicated their responsibility and eventually if this goes to SCOK as petition; they will be told why they didn't appeal to SCOK. This has to go to SCOK. That is IEBC main contention. SCOK have original jurisdiction in such matters.

It is the same IEBC that was telling Raila not to go to court.

Let me ask you, suppose you lose at the Supreme Court as well?

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

If IEBC don't appeal they would have abdicated their responsibility and eventually if this goes to SCOK as petition; they will be told why they didn't appeal to SCOK. This has to go to SCOK. That is IEBC main contention. SCOK have original jurisdiction in such matters.

It is the same IEBC that was telling Raila not to go to court.

Let me ask you, suppose you lose at the Supreme Court as well?

I am uneasy about SCOK, because I think they could overturn the ruling in favor of IEBC.  I have no idea what laws they would use to do that, but it could be something crazy like declaring Chebukati is a supreme returning officer, because?...the hierarchy thing you know.  Basically I don't trust that institution.

[MOON Ki]

I am uneasy about SCOK, because I think they could overturn the ruling in favor of IEBC.  I have no idea what laws they would use to do that, but it could be something crazy like declaring Chebukati is a supreme returning officer, because?...the hierarchy thing you know.  Basically I don't trust that institution.

My view too.   A key point is that the chief justice is a reactionary type.  He will have few problems sucking up to the current powers and dragging along enough of his colleagues.

[Kadame5]

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.

Pundit, the High Court has more experience than any level of the judiciary in dealing with election petitions. The only experience the Supreme Court has had with presidential election disputes was that one case which we all saw how it happened. The court just kept saying "no time" to any attempt at adducing evidence.  In one ruling, the court denied the petitioners everything they had asked for just because SOME of the things could not be physically brought to court. Kina Mutunga refused to allow even the downloading of data that would take 5 minutes tops. This is why I find it funny when people refer to that case as proof that there was no malpractice. My foot! I watched that case religiously for 1 week and the Supreme Court rejected all evidence virtually on the basis of "not enough time". Basically, your complaint against IEBC depends on evidence held by IEBC which the SCOK denies you because there is not enough time...and this becomes "The SC looked at the evidence and found no rigging.." SMH.....

[Kadame5]

If IEBC don't appeal they would have abdicated their responsibility and eventually if this goes to SCOK as petition; they will be told why they didn't appeal to SCOK. This has to go to SCOK. That is IEBC main contention. SCOK have original jurisdiction in such matters.

It is the same IEBC that was telling Raila not to go to court.

Let me ask you, suppose you lose at the Supreme Court as well?

I am uneasy about SCOK, because I think they could overturn the ruling in favor of IEBC.  I have no idea what laws they would use to do that, but it could be something crazy like declaring Chebukati is a supreme returning officer, because?...the hierarchy thing you know.  Basically I don't trust that institution.

Who knows, they might surprise you. I was worried about the Court of Appeal but am pleasantly surprised.

[RV Pundit]

Disagreed. SCOK understands the complexity of presidential election, the nature of the dispute and limited time - because PORK is BIG business - it no joke. Thesea guys are used to having ROs as final man - coz by their nature - RO is truly the final guy. high court and court of appeal normaly deal with case of RO versus some loser. They never get to deal with Chebukaiti versus Raila.

if SCOK has 1 experience ; lower courts have o.0 experience dealing with presidential petition.

Don't be like omollo - who doesn't think through things - come here and praise a decision and next time we will hear ohoo Jubilee bought ROS. This rulling is disaster for this country. it allows free for all. Obviously those that have more money & power will roll over ROs like chapatis - meaning incumbent like Uhuru just need to track ROS ..give each 10-30m and he is done. No need to waste 5B every month subsidizing Unga..just budget that money for ROS...in battleground regions. It given everyone will steal in their strongholds - maybe 99% turn out is feasible. Those that refuse to kowtow to Uhuru...will be intimidated by security forces and watched like hawks

SCOK if they say yes to this - then so be it. But this is so bad for CORD i actually pity you folks. You just got from frying pan directly to the fire. Intentionally. It's like ICC turned inside out you made Uhuru the defacto GEMA leader. That was Maina Kiai again. Some fools. You take a case with zero chance in hell and turned a rich kikuyu boy like Uhuru into a freedom fighter in the mold of his father

Pundit, the High Court has more experience than any level of the judiciary in dealing with election petitions. The only experience the Supreme Court has had with presidential election disputes was that one case which we all saw how it happened. The court just kept saying "no time" to any attempt at adducing evidence.  In one ruling, the court denied the petitioners everything they had asked for just because SOME of the things could not be physically brought to court. Kina Mutunga refused to allow even the downloading of data that would take 5 minutes tops. This is why I find it funny when people refer to that case as proof that there was no malpractice. My foot! I watched that case religiously for 1 week and the Supreme Court rejected all evidence virtually on the basis of "not enough time". Basically, your complaint against IEBC depends on evidence held by IEBC which the SCOK denies you because there is not enough time...and this becomes "The SC looked at the evidence and found no rigging.." SMH.....

[Kadame5]

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.

Pundit, I think IEBC's purpose is the same as that of every equivalent body in any democracy in the world. They organize elections, people vote, they count the votes in an open, public manner and announce. When there are disputes, someone runs to court and a recount or retally is ordered which is again done in an open, public manner.

[RV Pundit]

Ohoo boy - so we allow everyone to do whatever they want - and then wait for dispute or retally. This would be akin to ODM nomination. The only outcome is to cancel it. It would totally lack any credibility. Which is why IEBC have regulation to make sure everyone - esp the staff they hire - do their  job. When you emasculate IEBC bosses and say their juniors are now their seniors - what purpose of IEBC.

Why not have Judy pareno of ODM conduct our national election. The outcome will the the same. chaos. Everyone doing whatever they want.

Pundit, I think IEBC's purpose is the same as that of every equivalent body in any democracy in the world. They organize elections, people vote, they count the votes in an open, public manner and announce. When there are disputes, someone runs to court and a recount or retally is ordered which is again done in an open, public manner.

[Kadame5]

Ohoo boy - so we allow everyone to do whatever they want - and then wait for dispute or retally. This would be akin to ODM nomination. The only outcome is to cancel it. It would totally lack any credibility. Which is why IEBC have regulation to make sure everyone - esp the staff they hire - do their  job. When you emasculate IEBC bosses and say their juniors are now their seniors - what purpose of IEBC.

Why not have Judy pareno of ODM conduct our national election. The outcome will the the same. chaos. Everyone doing whatever they want.

Pundit, I think IEBC's purpose is the same as that of every equivalent body in any democracy in the world. They organize elections, people vote, they count the votes in an open, public manner and announce. When there are disputes, someone runs to court and a recount or retally is ordered which is again done in an open, public manner.

I don't think so. It would be cancelled if it cannot be remedied. But if there is some prima facie evidence of a problem, it looks like the forms don't agree with each other etc, the court can order a retallying of those places which should take a day. If the court needs a recount, it can also order that. If the court then determines that the result of that recount/retally is final, then it's final.

I fail to understand why you have this massive faith in IEBC but not the court whose every ruling is public? Besides, if the court re-opens a result and orders it redone, that process will be open and public. It will not be behind doors with a secret formula only IEBC knows about but won't share despite this being our election and not IEBC's private patented IP.

Pundit, from your arguments, it would not be a stretch to surmise that you are saying, sure, Chebukait can do whatever he wants to give us the APPEARANCE of a clean result and that's ok. I don't think that is why I or anyone I know queue for hours to vote. So that some big brother Commissioner can rearrange things for me to look "right"...why bother with elections at all?

If the results are beyond remedy, the Court can make a decision that may be painful but still open. When SCOTUS stopped Florida manual recounts in 2000 even though it was very clear Gore had caught up with Bush, it was an open and public decision. It wasn't because some big brother who knows best went in a one-man conclave and came out with an announcement once white smoke was spotted up the chimney.

[RV Pundit]

You're saying you trust judiciary you don't trust Iebc. I think we should trust both. And if you have an issue about XYZ - like I have about some judges - I would say so - but I retain my trust judiciary will do good job. What I don't want is to end up with ODM nomination. We already hold the world expensive elections. Maybe 40-60B for just holding elections. If we are going to hold elections where it;s a race to see who can rig - and eventually - supreme court will have no option but to annual - we have done nothing. We could even plunge this country to serious chaos.

In principle I think IEBC should be given as much leeway as possible to do their job as best as they can - and if we don't trust them - disband them - it plain useless to tie their hands and tell them go do an election where junior RO is senior to Chebukaiti. Judiciary should limit themselves to petitions. As of now Maina Kiai the litigant here has not lost any election. He is trying to solve a hypothetical problem.

Once IEBC have announced results - please rush to court - and proof rigging. That shouldn't be hard. It was so hard last time because there was no evidence. IEBC was not the problem. Hassan was not the problem. Chebukati is not the problem. We can appoint you there and you'll still not be the problem.

All I am hearing is we don't trust the national tallying center; we don't trust IEBC commisioners; we rather take our chances with 290 ROs. It huge mistake. You'll see in August if SCOK are not smart enough to realize this is upper-stupidity.

I don't think so. It would be cancelled if it cannot be remedied. But if there is some prima facie evidence of a problem, it looks like the forms don't agree with each other etc, the court can order a retallying of those places which should take a day. If the court needs a recount, it can also order that. If the court then determines that the result of that recount/retally is final, then it's final.

I fail to understand why you have this massive faith in IEBC but not the court whose every ruling is public? Besides, if the court re-opens a result and orders it redone, that process will be open and public. It will not be behind doors with a secret formula only IEBC knows about but won't share despite this being our election and not IEBC's private patented IP.

Pundit, from your arguments, it would not be a stretch to surmise that you are saying, sure, Chebukait can do whatever he wants to give us the APPEARANCE of a clean result and that's ok. I don't think that is why I or anyone I know queue for hours to vote. So that some big brother Commissioner can rearrange things for me to look "right"...why bother with elections at all?

If the results are beyond remedy, the Court can make a decision that may be painful but still open. When SCOTUS stopped Florida manual recounts in 2000 even though it was very clear Gore had caught up with Bush, it was an open and public decision. It wasn't because some big brother who knows best went in a one-man conclave and came out with an announcement once white smoke was spotted up the chimney.