Raila Odinga withdraws from repeat presidential election

[Empedocles]

• Tweet

So it happens.
Now stuck with the thieving duo.

https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001256965/raila-withdraws-from-repeat-presidential-election

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

So it happens.
Now stuck with the thieving duo.

https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001256965/raila-withdraws-from-repeat-presidential-election

They seem to be counting on the 2013 SCOK advisory kicking into motion.  The ball is now in Chebukati's court by this reasoning.

[RV Pundit]

Interesting days ahead.
First the Supreme Court made non-binding advisory opinion!
IEBC already barred Aukot from having a second bite -mean they agreed with advisory opinion - and so for consistent they would be expect rule the same way
Aukot didn't agree and rushed to SCOK 2017 - which send him back to high court- That case right now is sub-judice - it touches the same issue.
IEBC therefore should wait for Aukot rulling to guide it on this decision.

Another tricky part for NASA - is that in 2017 the election act set the procedure of withdrawal and Raila is already time-barred.

[vooke]

Interesting days ahead.
First the Supreme Court made non-binding advisory opinion!
IEBC already barred Aukot from having a second bite -mean they agreed with advisory opinion - and so for consistent they would be expect rule the same way
Aukot didn't agree and rushed to SCOK 2017 - which send him back to high court- That case right now is sub-judice - it touches the same issue.
IEBC therefore should wait for Aukot rulling to guide it on this decision.

Another tricky part for NASA - is that in 2017 the election act set the procedure of withdrawal and Raila is already time-barred.

[Omollo]

Which one is that? Favor me with a copy sir

Interesting days ahead.
First the Supreme Court made non-binding advisory opinion!
IEBC already barred Aukot from having a second bite -mean they agreed with advisory opinion - and so for consistent they would be expect rule the same way
Aukot didn't agree and rushed to SCOK 2017 - which send him back to high court- That case right now is sub-judice - it touches the same issue.
IEBC therefore should wait for Aukot rulling to guide it on this decision.

Another tricky part for NASA - is that in 2017 the election act set the procedure of withdrawal and Raila is already time-barred.

[Omollo]

It could have been non binding but the moment the IEBC accepted it and used the same - with the AG and IEBC making presentations quoting it (in the High court last week) it became binding for them. The "accepted" Raila's candidacy under that "non-binding" opinion. He too can exit using the same door.

As for your law, it's like having a firm plan to install a lock on the horse stable and accuse the horse of bolting when the carpenter was just about done. Later you accuse the horse of breaking out of the locked stable! Your law must be ready first to be binding on Raila. Now you know why I asked you about retractive powers of the law.

Interesting days ahead.
First the Supreme Court made non-binding advisory opinion!
IEBC already barred Aukot from having a second bite -mean they agreed with advisory opinion - and so for consistent they would be expect rule the same way
Aukot didn't agree and rushed to SCOK 2017 - which send him back to high court- That case right now is sub-judice - it touches the same issue.
IEBC therefore should wait for Aukot rulling to guide it on this decision.

Another tricky part for NASA - is that in 2017 the election act set the procedure of withdrawal and Raila is already time-barred.

[RV Pundit]

The non binding opinion on abandonment has no legs to stand on because quoted section only talks about death so iebc free to ignore it.IEBC can choose which advice to take or not...none of it is binding.

[bryan275]

If I remember correctly that 2013 clause was caused by the interfering advice from the  "friendly" mortician.

Jubilidiots are falling into traps that they set yesteryear.

Next it will be the riggers charter.

[RV Pundit]

The constitution requires iebc to conduct elections in 60 days and iebc cannot relie on advisory opinion backed by horse manure.They will conduct elections and refuse this withdrawal and if not rush to scork for directions.

[vooke]

The constitution requires iebc to conduct elections in 60 days and iebc cannot relie on advisory opinion backed by horse manure.They will conduct elections and refuse this withdrawal and if not rush to scork for directions.

How I look at it
Supposing the candidate abandoned/withdrew before nane nane. What happens? Do we have fresh nominations?  Of course not. He and his party forfeits the ticket.

Why would it be any different AFTER invalidation?

But death before or after disenfranchises the supporters h nce the need for nomination.

What to watch today is whether the direction of the court can be applied in retrospect

[RV Pundit]

There is nothing like abandon in our laws or constitution. So SCORK advisory clearly is only applicable as per 138 - in case of death or say suddenly a candidate doesn't qualify- become bankrupt or says Raila become insane or incapacitated or get jailed for more than six months.

Withdrawal can only happen 3 days after nomination - that period lapsed long time ago in May/June.

Raila is attempting to withdraw two weeks to election - clearly outside the time limit prescribed for withdrawal. IEBC on their own should make the decision - with SCORK advisory, their reading of the law and constitution. If they have any doubt - they can always go back to Supreme Court for more clarification.

But for them to use SCORK 2013 non-binding advisory to refuse to conduct election is stretching it too far.

So I expect IEBC to either
1) Dismiss Raila withdraw as outside the presribed time limit & proceed to hold elections as ordered by the constitution before 1st Nov
2) Seek court advisory on what happens when candidate withdraws after fresh election ordered btw petition and winner

Common sense is to wait first for Mativo rulling on Aukot case.
1) If Aukot get back - then proceed to hold elections btw him and Uhuru.
2) If Aukot fails to come back - then ask SCORK to decide if we need to hold election or not - it would be waste of money to hold a farcical election with one candidate running - so see if Uhuru can be declared elected Un-Opposed and kaboom sworn in.

How I look at it
Supposing the candidate abandoned/withdrew before nane nane. What happens? Do we have fresh nominations?  Of course not. He and his party forfeits the ticket.

Why would it be any different AFTER invalidation?

But death before or after disenfranchises the supporters h nce the need for nomination.

What to watch today is whether the direction of the court can be applied in retrospect

[Kichwa]

Stop the propaganda. There will be no elections on October 26 and Ouru will not be sworn in as president.  We are going to fresh nominations and elections in 90 days.  This will give us time to drain that swamp called IEBC to deal with the irregularities and illegalities. You can blame Githu Muigai if you want. If you want a country of laws, then we will have one but if you want to take us back to the Moi days then we are not going.

There is nothing like abandon in our laws or constitution. So SCORK advisory clearly is only applicable as per 138 - in case of death or say certainly doesn't qualify- become bankrupt or says Raila become insane or incapacitated or get jailed for more than six months.

Raila is attempting to withdraw two weeks to election - clearly outside the time limit prescribed for withdrawal. IEBC on their won should make the decision - with SCORK advisory, their reading of the law and constitution. If they have any doubt - they can always go back to Supreme Court for more clarification.

But for them to use SCORK 2013 non-binding advisory to refuse to conduct election is stretching it too far.

So I expect IEBC to either
1) Dismiss Raila withdraw as outside the presribed time limit & proceed to hold elections as ordered by the constitution before 1st Nov
2) Seek court advisory on what happens when candidate withdraws after fresh election ordered btw petition and winner.

How I look at it
Supposing the candidate abandoned/withdrew before nane nane. What happens? Do we have fresh nominations?  Of course not. He and his party forfeits the ticket.

Why would it be any different AFTER invalidation?

But death before or after disenfranchises the supporters h nce the need for nomination.

What to watch today is whether the direction of the court can be applied in retrospect

[RV Pundit]

What will you do in 90 days that you've been unable to do in the last 5 yrs with Okoa kenya, Hassan must go, election law changes, 100 court cases against IEBC prior to 8.8 and now daily demos & press conference against IEBC in the last 60 days. What will an extra 90 days do .

You know I'd love this 90 days be granted - coz I really would love to see NASA given a dog beating that is conclusive and without equivocation - IEBC just has to continue with their preparation - it simply a change of date and new nomination - and then another election - with the same players and same political field.

Election is won out there - and Jubilee is out there draining the swamp out of NASA. That my friend is the elephant in the house. You are asking for 3 more months - when clearly the last 2 months been a nightmare for your guys - you're broke, have no leverage and are losing supporters - 3 more months - and you'll be facing 20%:80%.

90 days give Ruto just all the time and money (from Uhuru) he need to start his 2022 campaigns - Uhuru already won 8.8 by nearly 1.5m votes. Now it's Ruto working on his 2022 by buying off NASA politicians using Uhuru's money. I'd love this charade to go longer - as long as there is NO NUSU MKATE.

Stop the propaganda. There will be no elections on October 26 and Ouru will not be sworn in as president.  We are going to fresh nominations and elections in 90 days.  This will give us time to drain that swamp called IEBC to deal with the irregularities and illegalities. You can blame Githu Muigai if you want. If you want a country of laws, then we will have one but if you want to take us back to the Moi days then we are not going.

[Omollo]

Jubilee has made an about face in desperation and threatened Mativo to make his judgment early today. Aukot was woken up to be ready for the judgment at 9 am brought back from 2 PM.

Pundit, you can not seek an advisory from the SCoK on thze same matter.

What Jubilee will attempt is to arm twist IEBC to declare Uhuru "winner" or run a sham election between him and Aukot.

In that case the Aukot case if it goes as per Uhuru's wish, will be appealed at the Court of Appeal before landing at the SCoK.

Even your own man Murkomen has advised against the coup you are trying. However my view remains that the desperation you are in will force you to try to steal and you will be humiliated again.

If that SCOK advisory is not binding, why is Jubilee in Parliament trying to fix it?
Why did Muigai quote it when opposing Aukot
Why did IEBC cite it against Aukot.

Anyway, I will not comment any further. Knock yourself out. You will lose again and still return to give yourself full marks for being the best pundit. There will be no elections this year. You can give Veritas my USD 100 from the last bet and place another 100 for this one.

[RV Pundit]

Interestingly Raila support Aukot inclusion terming this a fresh/new election   while Uhuru & IEBC using the SCORK 2013 & "International" best practise as the basis opposes Aukot inclusion. Yesterday Raila took a 360 and supported SCORK 2013 advisory opinion. So it appears people will take the advice they want. Actually will not take the advice at all. SCORK 2013 advisory opinion is not worth that much...esp when it quotes an article that only talks about death and introduce "abandon". Raila has withdrawn - he is time-barred according to withdrawal case.

This will end again in SCORK 2017 and hopefully they now realize that they can't help Raila at all. He is being abandoned left right and center by his political allies & financiers. There is nothing any court can do to make him PORK.

As regard to parliament - parliament job is to continuously make and amend law to deal with new issues - right now we are relying on judiciary & IEBC to interpret law - parliament is working hard to make sure everything that can be codified is codified. I don't see any problem with that.

Jubilee has made an about face in desperation and threatened Mativo to make his judgment early today. Aukot was woken up to be ready for the judgment at 9 am brought back from 2 PM.

Pundit, you can not seek an advisory from the SCoK on thze same matter.

What Jubilee will attempt is to arm twist IEBC to declare Uhuru "winner" or run a sham election between him and Aukot.

In that case the Aukot case if it goes as per Uhuru's wish, will be appealed at the Court of Appeal before landing at the SCoK.

Even your own man Murkomen has advised against the coup you are trying. However my view remains that the desperation you are in will force you to try to steal and you will be humiliated again.

If that SCOK advisory is not binding, why is Jubilee in Parliament trying to fix it?
Why did Muigai quote it when opposing Aukot
Why did IEBC cite it against Aukot.

Anyway, I will not comment any further. Knock yourself out. You will lose again and still return to give yourself full marks for being the best pundit. There will be no elections this year. You can give Veritas my USD 100 from the last bet and place another 100 for this one.