Form 34A or 34B, Which is Final?

[vooke]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

[vooke]

Moving on to the second ground, the appellant submitted that Article 138 (3) (c) requires it to verify the count before declaring the result of the presidential election and for that purpose its chairperson is required to tally and verify the count from all polling stations before declaring the result. and not to alter and/or vary results as was interpreted by the High Court.


NOTE
Article 138 (3) (c)
(C) after counting the votes in the polling stations, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission shall tally and verify the count and declare the result.

IEBC held that this mandate to verify was discharged by the chairperson at NTC

[vooke]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

The commission makes  sure it is done by hiring ROs and POs,and not tasking Chebu personally to verify.

Yes.  Also Kiai did not forbid Chebukati from ensuring that the ROs and POs generate 34Bs from valid 34As.  No they did not.

[vooke]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

The commission makes  sure it is done by hiring ROs and POs,and not tasking Chebu personally to verify.

Yes.  Also Kiai did not forbid Chebukati from ensuring that the ROs and POs generate 34Bs from valid 34As.  No they did not.

Nor did it forbid Chebu from ensuring that vote counting started after voting stopped.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

The commission makes  sure it is done by hiring ROs and POs,and not tasking Chebu personally to verify.

Yes.  Also Kiai did not forbid Chebukati from ensuring that the ROs and POs generate 34Bs from valid 34As.  No they did not.

Nor did it forbid Chebu from ensuring that vote counting started after voting stopped.

Yeah.  That too.  He is wasting the court's time.  In any case there is a new law coming that might allow him to get away with what was illegal in the old.

[vooke]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

The commission makes  sure it is done by hiring ROs and POs,and not tasking Chebu personally to verify.

Yes.  Also Kiai did not forbid Chebukati from ensuring that the ROs and POs generate 34Bs from valid 34As.  No they did not.

Nor did it forbid Chebu from ensuring that vote counting started after voting stopped.

Yeah.  That too.  He is wasting the court's time.  In any case there is a new law coming that might allow him to get away with what was illegal in the old.

Kiai case did not forbid Chebu from ensuring that votes counted had to be valid. Chebu did not ensure this because he had no live stream from each of the 40K stations. He just trusted his 40K ROs. He failed

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

The commission makes  sure it is done by hiring ROs and POs,and not tasking Chebu personally to verify.

Yes.  Also Kiai did not forbid Chebukati from ensuring that the ROs and POs generate 34Bs from valid 34As.  No they did not.

Nor did it forbid Chebu from ensuring that vote counting started after voting stopped.

Yeah.  That too.  He is wasting the court's time.  In any case there is a new law coming that might allow him to get away with what was illegal in the old.

Kiai case did not forbid Chebu from ensuring that votes counted had to be valid. Chebu did not ensure this because he had no live stream from each of the 40K stations. He just trusted his 40K ROs. He failed

Whatever peels your banana.  When you find the law that prevents Chebukati from doing his work, you know where to find me.

[vooke]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

The commission makes  sure it is done by hiring ROs and POs,and not tasking Chebu personally to verify.

Yes.  Also Kiai did not forbid Chebukati from ensuring that the ROs and POs generate 34Bs from valid 34As.  No they did not.

Nor did it forbid Chebu from ensuring that vote counting started after voting stopped.

Yeah.  That too.  He is wasting the court's time.  In any case there is a new law coming that might allow him to get away with what was illegal in the old.

Kiai case did not forbid Chebu from ensuring that votes counted had to be valid. Chebu did not ensure this because he had no live stream from each of the 40K stations. He just trusted his 40K ROs. He failed

Whatever peels your banana.  When you find the law that prevents Chebukati from doing his work, you know where to find me.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It's rhetorical. Unless there is some new quirk in the laws that actually prevents him.  I don't see it.  Kiai only prevents him from modifying the completed forms.

I have read Kiai and disagree with your interpretation.   Consider that possibility.

http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/137601/

There is nowhere in the ruling where Chebukati is forbidden from verifying 34As to generate 34Bs.  He can do it if he chooses.  After 34Bs, his hands are tied.  Your whine boils down to not liking that fact.  It's not an argument.

That is why you should first find the law, then bleat. 

Verifying 34As to generate 34Bs? You make sure the 34As are valid.  That they meet certain requirements.  Then you include them in the tally.  Otherwise you don't include them.

If they are not valid then they are not 34As in the first place. So if you mean checking whether the scans are images of forms 34A or used tea bags, then you have a point except it is hopelessly truism

There is no law on earth that prevents Chebukati from making sure that is done.

The commission makes  sure it is done by hiring ROs and POs,and not tasking Chebu personally to verify.

Yes.  Also Kiai did not forbid Chebukati from ensuring that the ROs and POs generate 34Bs from valid 34As.  No they did not.

Nor did it forbid Chebu from ensuring that vote counting started after voting stopped.

Yeah.  That too.  He is wasting the court's time.  In any case there is a new law coming that might allow him to get away with what was illegal in the old.

Kiai case did not forbid Chebu from ensuring that votes counted had to be valid. Chebu did not ensure this because he had no live stream from each of the 40K stations. He just trusted his 40K ROs. He failed

Whatever peels your banana.  When you find the law that prevents Chebukati from doing his work, you know where to find me.

Yeah.  Just as moronic as blaming Hitler for the genocide that his minions committed. 

[vooke]

Moving on to the second ground, the appellant submitted that Article 138 (3) (c) requires it to verify the count before declaring the result of the presidential election and for that purpose its chairperson is required to tally and verify the count from all polling stations before declaring the result. and not to alter and/or vary results as was interpreted by the High Court.


NOTE
Article 138 (3) (c)
(C) after counting the votes in the polling stations, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission shall tally and verify the count and declare the result.

IEBC held that this mandate to verify was discharged by the chairperson at NTC

One of the most powerful but seemingly innocuous argument advanced by Kiai Case was distinguishing the Commission from the chairperson.

IEBC is shall verify does not mean Chairperson shall verify, and so long as the duty is discharged by someone within IEBC, IEBC has did it.

The chairperson on the other hand is appointed under Article 250 of the Constitution. The chairperson therefore cannot be, and is not, the appellant. It is envisaged in Article 86 that for the purpose of conducting an election the appellant will be represented at the polling stations and constituency tallying centres by the presiding officers, and the returning officers, respectively, who as we have seen, are appointed by the appellant. They are in every respect employees of the appellant and its agents in the eyes of the law. The appellant has the opportunity, indeed a duty, to vet all its prospective employees to ensure they pass the integrity test before engaging them. Members and employees of the appellant are bound by a code of conduct. In any case apart from the offences related to voting, or any other election-related offences committed by members or employees of the appellant created under the Election Offences Act, section 30 of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission Act makes it an offence for a member or employee of the appellant, to knowingly subvert the process of free and fair elections. A person who is convicted of an election-offence is not eligible to hold public office for a period of ten years following the conviction. As we have indicated, there are several mechanisms that the appellant can and must deploy to eradicate malfeasance on the part of its staff and officers.

[vooke]

PREDICTION: Supreme Court to rule that there is nothing to clarify in their ruling, arguing it was very clear

— -Dennis Itumbi, CBS (@OleItumbi) October 17, 2017

[bryan275]

PREDICTION: Supreme Court to rule that there is nothing to clarify in their ruling, arguing it was very clear

— -Dennis Itumbi, CBS (@OleItumbi) October 17, 2017

Capitulation... another one of Jubilee's tricks hits the dust.

[vooke]

SCOK has no jurisdiction

Poor Chebu

But public interest prevails

[vooke]

34A or 34B?

Question is mischief

[vooke]

Chebu should note the errors if at all between 34A and 34Bs, and NOTIFY the candidates

[vooke]

Kiai case did not stop Chebu from verifying

[RV Pundit]

Mwilu reading majority decision - I guess the schism is permanent.

[RV Pundit]

- and then

Chebu should note the errors if at all between 34A and 34Bs, and NOTIFY the candidates