Uhuru Kenyatta Launches a Well Coordinated Attack on Judiciary

[Omollo]

• Tweet

The attack appears well coordinated with surrogates and bots all speaking of a NASA plot to postpone elections - which of course Uhuru says he will not accept!

The game is that they are delaying the re-tendering by forcing the confused IEBC to appeal but want NASA blamed for any delays. The IEBC sought a stay of execution the high court denied it and asked them to get on complying with the ruling.

Note that it is not new. NASA applied for a stay against the printing, the High court declined. They will move to the Court of Appeal tomorrow and seek a stay. Most likely it will be denied but they will be asked to speed up. Because if the stay is granted, then there is nothing to cure later.

Here is Chebukati saying he will convene a meeting of presidents and institute public participation as ordered by the courts in the one paragraph. Now pay attention to what he says on the next about Public Participation. Tell me how a decent court would interpret that.

This was the FIRST:


Then This one:

[vooke]

Was the republic participation in procuring the EVID kits?

[Nefertiti]

There is nothing wrong with criticizing court decisions. It happens all the time in many democracies. The courts should strictly act independently regardless of politicians' wishes and utterances.

[Omollo]

The Ethnic Rag

President Uhuru Kenyatta has warned judges against frustrating the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) in order not to conduct the August 8 General Election.

The President said he would not accept any attempt to postpone the polls.

Speaking at Kabartonjo Primary School in Baringo County on Sunday, President Kenyatta said the Judiciary should not take them for fools for being silent as the courts make decisions that could lead to the postponement of the elections.

He said they will no longer keep silent as the Judiciary continues to put up obstacles towards the preparations for the coming polls.

"I want to tell those in the courts that because we have respected you for a long time we are not fools.

We cannot accept the courts to be used by those not interested in the elections to frustrate IEBC," said the President.

SILENT

He said that they had kept silent in order not to be seen to be interfering with the independence of another arm of government but warned that things would not be the same again.

Responding to the recent High Court ruling that barred IEBC from contracting Dubai-based Al Ghurair company from printing the presidential ballots, the President said it was puzzling that the electoral agency had been allowed to go ahead with printing ballot papers for other elective positions except for the president.

READ: IEBC calls meeting to end tender row

"They don't have a problem with the printing of ballot papers for MCA, MP, Woman Rep, Senator and governor but they have an issue with those for the President. Do they think we are fools?" he posed.

RANSOM

Deputy President William Ruto said they would not accept any attempt by their opponents to use the courts to hold the electoral agency at ransom.

He criticised the Chief Justice David Maraga for asking the IEBC not to print the ballot papers until court cases were determined.

"When the Chief Justice tells the IEBC not to print papers because there are court cases what does he know that we do not know, does he know how the cases will be decided," said Mr Ruto.

BALLOT PAPERS

Last week, CJ Maraga warned IEBC against printing ballot papers before petitions facing some of the nominees were fully adjudicated upon.

Elgeyo-Marakwet Senator Kipchumba Murkomen said the judiciary should be ready to be held responsible in case elections fail to take place.

"The CJ should decide whether he wants to run the country through the judiciary. If anything happens in this country on or after elections, the judiciary should take full responsibility," said the senator.

The CJ, in his Twitter handle on Sunday, termed the accusations as unfortunate.

" I would not ordinarily respond to statements made by politicians in the course of campaign activities, but these accusations are particularly unfortunate, based that they are on completely wrong premises."

BALLOT PRINTING

The CJ said at no time had he asked the IEBC not to proceed with ballot printing, contrary to statements the Deputy President William Ruto at a rally in Baringo on Sunday.

"The comments I made in Mombasa and elsewhere, which were either deliberately or inadvertently taken out of context, were in reference to the courts' efforts to expeditiously clear the numerous petitions arising from the party primaries in order not to inconvenience the printing of ballot papers," said Maraga.

The CJ added: " I have always been at the forefront of defending the cardinal principle of decisional independence of judges, and at no time have I ever directed any judge or judicial officer on how to determine the cases before them."

[Kichwa]

 When will IEBC stand up to Jubilee and tell them to stop pushing them around. The ruling is a loss for Jubilee but  Iebc does not have to appeal this case, because the ruling does not adversely affect the institutions.  Infact it empowers IEBC making them harder to influence by a party like Jubilee next time around.  They should preserve this ruling, immediately start consultations and have another  printer print the presidential ballots.  Chebukati must divorce IEBC  from Jubilee.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing court decisions. It happens all the time in many democracies. The courts should strictly act independently regardless of politicians' wishes and utterances.

[Nefertiti]

That's true but has nothing to do with the politicians or Uhuru. IEBC's and judicial independence are guaranteed by the constitution. They should simply ignore/resist to be pushed around. They have themselves to blame if they don't.

 When will IEBC stand up to Jubilee and tell them to stop pushing them around. The ruling is a loss for Jubilee but  Iebc does not have to appeal this case, because the ruling does not adversely affect the institutions.  Infact it empowers IEBC making them harder to influence by a party like Jubilee next time around.  They should preserve this ruling, immediately start consultations and have another  printer print the presidential ballots.  Chebukati must divorce IEBC  from Jubilee.

[Omollo]

The target is the court of Appeal. They want a stay of execution which would effectively mean the end of the case and victory for them by default.

For some reason they had believed that the Court of Appeal would rule in their favor in the Bomas Rigging Center. That did not happen and then they intimidated Odunga in to not giving stay against Al Ghurair - not knowing they were setting themselves up incase they lost. This is anger directed at Maraga who they believed would set up a "friendly" bench and had even gone with the names.

Unfortunately, they misread the law which places the Court of Appeal under its president and he is NOT Maraga. Justice Paul Kihara Kariuki - I believe - is the one who Muhoro denied a clearance certificate thus denying him the chance to rise to the Supreme Court.

These two are as silly as you get. Had they promoted Kariuki, he would probably be on their side. Instead they antagonized him and all he had to do is his job. There is an Omtatah suit questioning the powers of the CJ in setting up benches so he has taken to consulting Justice Paul Kihara Kariuki knowing if he doesn't and the court finds for Omtatah, then all the judgements would be rendered dead and powerless.

They also have a problem when claiming that the elections will be delayed:

1. There are precedents of printing taking place days before voting
2. Daily Newspapers print and distribute millions of multiple copy newspapers every day
3. The Al Ghurair schedule for printing presidential papers (tabled by the IEBC itself) sets the date to 18th of July

Lastly, there is no crisis incase an election is delayed. The 2010 constitution took care of that by allowing the incumbent to remain in office until the new president has taken the oath of office. This cured the previous problem when the term of the president expired and therefore rendered the country leaderless.

 When will IEBC stand up to Jubilee and tell them to stop pushing them around. The ruling is a loss for Jubilee but  Iebc does not have to appeal this case, because the ruling does not adversely affect the institutions.  Infact it empowers IEBC making them harder to influence by a party like Jubilee next time around.  They should preserve this ruling, immediately start consultations and have another  printer print the presidential ballots.  Chebukati must divorce IEBC  from Jubilee.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing court decisions. It happens all the time in many democracies. The courts should strictly act independently regardless of politicians' wishes and utterances.

[Omollo]

...CJ answer back...but this pingpong game with politicians is not necessary...ignore them bwana CJ... pic.twitter.com/xdzNdZ6lLJ

— Ahmednasir Abdullahi SC (@ahmednasirlaw) July 9, 2017

[RV Pundit]

Nobody is talking about implications of cancelling the contract n where iebc will another 400m for presidential printing .

[vooke]

Maranga should go easy on issuing statements outside the court which can be misunderstood. There's another statement he made in Houma Bay and NASA were up in arms.

[Omollo]

Nobody is talking about implications of cancelling the contract n where iebc will another 400m for presidential printing .

What are these implications?

About 400 M, the assumption is that no money has been paid out to Al Ghurair and that they can't invoice for a job not done. The IEBC would be wise to withhold payment for that item by exploiting the variation clause standard in all contracts. It is the same clause exploited daily to inflate original tender sums.

[MOON Ki]

That's true but has nothing to do with the politicians or Uhuru. IEBC's and judicial independence are guaranteed by the constitution. They should simply ignore/resist to be pushed around. They have themselves to blame if they don't.

To my mind, these are the "critical" words:

"I want to tell those in the courts that because we have respected you for a long time we are not fools. We cannot accept the courts to be used by those not interested in the elections to frustrate IEBC," said the President.

In many well-run places, these would be considered very alarming words.   First, what evidence is there that "the courts [are being] used ...".    Second, what are the criteria for "used" and "frustrated"?   The courts are right or wrong on the law and facts, or they are not.  If the latter, then there is still a higher court; have the "non-fool", "frustrated" lot reached that point?  Third, there is the (nominal?) independence of the IEBC.

It is one thing to state a disagreement or dislike of court rulings, but this seems to be an attempt to send a crude message to the Supreme Court, and in a place like Kenya it could even well work.    But what is alarming is the "not accept"---that the "leader" of a country should so boldly and publicly state that he will  accept legal rulings only to a certain point, on the basis of unspecified and unknown criteria.   And what form will his "non-acceptance" take?

I also consider it somewhat unfair to ask that the IEBC "should simply ignore/resist to be pushed around. They have themselves to blame if they don't".    This is Kenya.   How real is it to expect that people can easily ignore crude "warning", especially when these go above them and to the courts on who they might rely on for "protection".

The words go well beyond the legal fisticuffs about tenders ad what-not.   Not since Moi have I heard words that made so concerned about the future of Kenya.     Beyond the obvious,  immediate effect,  imagine a "trickle-down" effect in which people refuse to accept legal rulings on the basis of "used", "frustrated", and whatever other vague criterion that they can dream up.

If we are to avoid a slide back to some of what we have already "tasted", or a total descent to the "African Standard"---rebel army and all---then it is crucial to nurture the independence of and respect for the judiciary ... and the erosion always starts at the top.  We have made some progress, but we are still not there.  Power is still in play in the judiciary: think of cases like Okemo and Gichuru, wanted since-when in Jersey or wherever,  Barasa and others still "wanted" at the ICC, etc.     The sheeple, being sheeple, might be slow, but eventually, they too will decide that they are not "fools", that they will not be "used", that they are "frustrated" ... why should only the rich and powerful be in a position to "appreciate" those?

[Kichwa]

This is most likely what happens just before you get a Somalia, Libya, Syria and other failed Nations.  Its starts with such reckless talk.

That's true but has nothing to do with the politicians or Uhuru. IEBC's and judicial independence are guaranteed by the constitution. They should simply ignore/resist to be pushed around. They have themselves to blame if they don't.

To my mind, these are the "critical" words:

"I want to tell those in the courts that because we have respected you for a long time we are not fools. We cannot accept the courts to be used by those not interested in the elections to frustrate IEBC," said the President.

In many well-run places, these would be considered very alarming words.   First, what evidence is there that "the courts [are being] used ...".    Second, what are the criteria for "used" and "frustrated"?   The courts are right or wrong on the law and facts, or they are not.  If the latter, then there is still a higher court; have the "non-fool", "frustrated" lot reached that point?  Third, there is the (nominal?) independence of the IEBC.

It is one thing to state a disagreement or dislike of court rulings, but this seems to be an attempt to send a crude message to the Supreme Court, and in a place like Kenya it could even well work.    But what is alarming is the "not accept"---that the "leader" of a country should so boldly and publicly state that he will  accept legal rulings only to a certain point, on the basis of unspecified and unknown criteria.   And what form will his "non-acceptance" take?

I also consider it somewhat unfair to ask that the IEBC "should simply ignore/resist to be pushed around. They have themselves to blame if they don't".    This is Kenya.   How real is it to expect that people can easily ignore crude "warning", especially when these go above them and to the courts on who they might rely on for "protection".

The words go well beyond the legal fisticuffs about tenders ad what-not.   Not since Moi have I heard words that made so concerned about the future of Kenya.     Beyond the obvious,  immediate effect,  imagine a "trickle-down" effect in which people refuse to accept legal rulings on the basis of "used", "frustrated", and whatever other vague criterion that they can dream up.

If we are to avoid a slide back to some of what we have already "tasted", or a total descent to the "African Standard"---rebel army and all---then it is crucial to nurture the independence of and respect for the judiciary ... and the erosion always starts at the top.  We have made some progress, but we are still not there.  Power is still in play in the judiciary: think of cases like Okemo and Gichuru, wanted since-when in Jersey or wherever,  Barasa and others still "wanted" at the ICC, etc.     The sheeple, being sheeple, might be slow, but eventually, they too will decide that they are not "fools", that they will not be "used", that they are "frustrated" ... why should only the rich and powerful be in a position to "appreciate" those?

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

This is most likely what happens just before you get a Somalia, Libya, Syria and other failed Nations.  Its starts with such reckless talk.

What remedy does he have in case things don't go his way?  I can't see it.  Maybe he officially declares open season on the law in Kenya?  But how?  By arresting IEBC?  The Judges?  Raila?

[Omollo]

Shameful rhetoric that will return to haunt them. One must think of his legacy. Theyx seem to have decided to go down burning.

What remedy does he have in case things don't go his way?  I can't see it.  Maybe he officially declares open season on the law in Kenya?  But how?  By arresting IEBC?  The Judges?  Raila?

[MOON Ki]

What remedy does he have in case things don't go his way?  I can't see it.  Maybe he officially declares open season on the law in Kenya?  But how?  By arresting IEBC?  The Judges?  Raila?

Rhetorical questions, right?  OK, for "entertainment", I'll humour you.   

Remember your first girlfriend in secondary school?  How you told her that you were tired of holding hands and that if she didn't put put out, you'd move on?  We don't know the rest of the story, but you probably didn't mean it, and no doubt  you secretly hoped it wouldn't get to that point. And perhaps  she ended up doing the "right thing", which would have been tricky had you broadcast it all around.  That's how a "good" threat works. Calculated "intimidation". 

But calculated intimidation is  only one part of a good threat.  The other part is a serious consideration of the long-term consequences. 

To my mind, what is important here is not what Uhuru can or might do if he is "defied".  What is important is the "message" it sends to all, high and low---that the law is to be "tolerated" or "accepted" as long as they do not go "too far" beyond what one would like.  That's a very dangerous message for a leader (even a nominal one) to send to the populace.   And, even by Kenyan standards, it is an extraordinary one:

- At their worst, neither Johnstone Kamau nor Arap Moi ever (as best as I can recall) ever, publicly or so crudely, expressed their disdain for the Judiciary.   Of course, they didn't give a shite about the law, but they had enough "sensitivity" to get around it by fiddling with both the Judiciary and the Legislature.

In Kenya today we are just trying to get to the start of "civilized governance", and even thus far it is clear that that the Judiciary is not entirely independent. In the long term it doesn't help for the top to undermine the core foundations of what are trying to build.***   In the short term, a serious worry is in the idle, testosterone-filled, unemployed and unemployable youth that makes up a good chunk of the population. While they wait for their 5-day IT training (certificate included) to start raking it in doing BPO in Konza City, what better activity to keep busy than supporting "our man". And is there any higher "our man" than His Excellency?  [I did a quick Google search on how many have been killed or injured in fighting for "our man" than have been in fighting corruption, lack of government services, etc.]

*** I keep reading about things like a "Third Liberation".   Incredible.   Why not aim for just one or two good "liberations"?   

[MOON Ki]

Shameful rhetoric that will return to haunt them. One must think of his legacy. Theyx seem to have decided to go down burning.

As far as I can tell, "legacy" is irrelevant: our "leaders" never think of or care for anything beyond what they can eat in 5 years.  But it sure would be nice to see signs of thought on how they think the country will look like in the long term. 

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

What remedy does he have in case things don't go his way?  I can't see it.  Maybe he officially declares open season on the law in Kenya?  But how?  By arresting IEBC?  The Judges?  Raila?

Rhetorical questions, right?  OK, for "entertainment", I'll humour you.   

Remember your first girlfriend in secondary school?  How you told her that you were tired of holding hands and that if she didn't put put out, you'd move on?  We don't know the rest of the story, but you probably didn't mean it, and no doubt  you secretly hoped it wouldn't get to that point. And perhaps  she ended up doing the "right thing", which would have been tricky had you broadcast it all around.  That's how a "good" threat works. Calculated "intimidation". 

But calculated intimidation is  only one part of a good threat.  The other part is a serious consideration of the long-term consequences. 

To my mind, what is important here is not what Uhuru can or might do if he is "defied".  What is important is the "message" it sends to all, high and low---that the law is to be "tolerated" or "accepted" as long as they do not go "too far" beyond what one would like.  That's a very dangerous message for a leader (even a nominal one) to send to the populace.   And, even by Kenyan standards, it is an extraordinary one:

- At their worst, neither Johnstone Kamau nor Arap Moi ever (as best as I can recall) ever, publicly or so crudely, expressed their disdain for the Judiciary.   Of course, they didn't give a shite about the law, but they had enough "sensitivity" to get around it by fiddling with both the Judiciary and the Legislature.

In Kenya today we are just trying to get to the start of "civilized governance", and even thus far it is clear that that the Judiciary is not entirely independent. In the long term it doesn't help for the top to undermine the core foundations of what are trying to build.***   In the short term, a serious worry is in the idle, testosterone-filled, unemployed and unemployable youth that makes up a good chunk of the population. While they wait for their 5-day IT training (certificate included) to start raking it in doing BPO in Konza City, what better activity to keep busy than supporting "our man". And is there any higher "our man" than His Excellency?  [I did a quick Google search on how many have been killed or injured in fighting for "our man" than have been in fighting corruption, lack of government services, etc.]

*** I keep reading about things like a "Third Liberation".   Incredible.   Why not aim for just one or two good "liberations"?   

The key difference in Moi's time?  He didn't have to do it.  The judiciary was not even nominally independent.  Not to mention the guy could detain you for anything.  Kamwana is making threats that I would respect if they are coming from Kagame, maybe even Museveni.

[Kichwa]

It's hard to understand who his audience was. I think he was just trying to please his supporters to think he is tough. I do not see the judiciary or NASA scared of such empty rhetoric. Ouru knows he does not hold all the cards. He can make his supporters believe that but he does not. When hell breaks loose it will break for everybody. When Moi or Kenyatta threatened, they actually had the tools to follow up on their threat and people trembled. Ouru went on a rant and nobody seems scared.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's hard to understand who his audience was. I think he was just trying to please his supporters to think he is tough. I do not see the judiciary or NASA scared of such empty rhetoric. Ouru knows he does not hold all the cards. He can make his supporters believe that but he does not. When hell breaks loose it will break for everybody. When Moi or Kenyatta threatened, they actually had the tools to follow up on their threat and people trembled. Ouru went on a rant and nobody seems scared.

Their base.  They must be itching for them to show some courage.  By disrespecting the courts.  I am not sure how that would work in IEBC's situation.  Chebukati does not look the part of defying courts.

More likely as MOON Ki says, it is part of calculated intimidation of the next judge who might entertain real independence in their decision making.  They have been absorbing some blows via their IEBC proxy lately.