MaxShimba
JF-Expert Member
- Apr 11, 2008
- 35,771
- 4,065
President-Elect Uhuru Kenyatta, and his deputy William Ruto, have launched a legal battle to retain their declared victory by exposing compelling evidence of the machinations of Raila Odinga in an attempt to delude the Supreme Court and rob them of victory over the 2013 presidential elections in Kenya. According to the country's reputable Standard Media newspaper, both Jubilee leaders filed their affidavits, challenging issues Raila raised in pursuit of annulment of their victory in the Supreme Court. In response to Raila's claims on the integrity of the results declared by the electoral body, they claimed the Prime Minister was circumventing justice, "as a means to negotiate his way into their government."
The newspaper reported that even as the Supreme Court warned the parties to desist from commenting on the cases, it emerged Wednesday that remarks made by the PM and his political allies in the past 10 days would form part of the evidence to be used against him in the petition.
President-elect Kenyatta has submitted in court video clips and news reports on virtually all the public statements that Raila and others, including Machakos Senator-elect Johnson Muthama, have made on the elections and the outcome. According to Standadr Media, in one of the clips, Raila was recorded saying the victory was stolen from him and that they (Uhuru and Ruto) are criminals who should be in jail. In another, the PM is recorded saying he won the elections by garnering 52 to 53 per cent of the votes cast.
In fact, as we go to press, despite recommendations by the Head of Kenya's Head of Civil Service Francis Kimemia, for elected cabinet ministers to resign, Raila Odinga has chosen to flagrantly abuse his office by insisting he and his cabinet ministers would stay on until a new government takes over. This is contrary to what Kenya's new constitution lays out.
Uhuru and Ruto have taken up what is essentially a fight for the credibility of Independent Electoral and Boundaries (IEBC). The two have not been cited directly in the claims over flawed elections, but they are aware they would be the biggest casualties if the March 4 presidential election results were to be invalidated.
They submit the elections were as credible as humanly possible and complied substantially with the provisions of the constitution and the electoral laws.
"The public utterances by the petitioner since the election when seen against the orders sought in the petition are so broad and ungovernable that it appears he seems intent on provoking a constitutional leadership crisis that would enable him to negotiate his way to the government," Uhuru said in a sworn affidavit.
The Jubilee leaders have submitted in court statements of at least seven witnesses whom they would call to rebut issues raised in Raila's petition.
They include a representative of the Kencall Ltd, Alex Nesbitt and Information Communication Technology expert Stephen Mwangi, to rebut claims by Raila that IEBC allowed the firm to co-host their server with that of Uhuru's TNA party.
The newspaper went on to report that another witness is the Jubilee chief presidential agent and URP Secretary-General Kimutai Chirchir whose evidence touches on virtually all the aspects of the preparation and the conduct of the elections. "The electoral process as with all human endeavors does encounter problems all over the world but the election held on March 4 exceeded the statutory threshold for a credible election," Uhuru contends. He says the 832,887 votes difference between him and Raila was "very significant and emphatically demonstrated the resolve of the voters to exercise their sovereign will".
Ruto maintains the Jubilee team won the presidency by over 50.02 per cent. "Part of the Jubilee coalition votes were lost in an improper reconciling of spoilt and rejected votes but the coalition accepted the declared results," he says in the papers prepared by his lawyer Katwa Kigen.
He says Raila's allegation that Uhuru did not garner over 50 per cent votes was unfounded and untrue. The Jubilee luminaries contend that most of the observers accredited by IEBC, including Heads of States and representatives of other countries, had returned the verdict the polls were substantially free, fair and credible.
Their lawyers led by Fred Ngaitia for Uhuru and Kigen for Ruto,argue the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain some of?the questions of criminal culpability sought by Raila against the IEBC?and its chairman. It cannot deal, they go on, with the procurement process of the?electronic equipment used in the polls.
Ruto says Raila cannot seek what would be an invalidation of all the other elections for other seats. The court has no power to address the issue of voter registration, civic education, campaigns, elections and declarations into various offices, they added.
Uhuru accused Raila of exaggerating facts, and suppressing material facts to mislead the court.
The Jubilee leaders, just like IEBC Chairman Ahmed Isaack Hassan in his affidavit filed on Tuesday evening, are also using Raila's past conduct to discredit his?case. They claim that in 2007, Raila refused to challenge his defeat in court after rejecting the presidential results, saying he did not trust the judiciary.
Uhuru and Ruto enumerated steps and activities undertaken by IEBC from registration of voters to the actual tallying of votes and announcement of the winner. This is to demonstrate that the commission performed a credible job and the election should not be invalidated.
Uhuru added that as Prime Minister, Raila supervised the "government to government" tender for the procurement of Biometric Voter Registration kits from Canada.
He will be producing alleged video evidence of Raila's and Orange Democratic Movement's statements regarding the procurement of the kits. Uhuru says the PM and other senior ODM members complained and the process was terminated midway. They then demanded the IEBC should revert to manual system of registering voters.
The Standadrd Media went on to report that the Jubilee leaders are saying the constitution does not compel the commission to use the electronic system either in registration of voters, verification, and transmission of results or tallying. IEBC is only obliged by the law to announce results on the basis of manual Forms 34. The requirement is to ensure the system is simple, accurate, verifiable, accountable and transparent.
The two defended the procurement of the BVR kits saying the problems in acquiring them had been resolved by the High Court. The process was transparent and all stakeholders were involved by the IEBC, they said, adding that even the Canadian government had also assured Kenya the deal was above board.
They contend that after the collapse of the electronic systems, tallying and announcement of results on the basis of Forms 34 was the only lawful means available.
Exposed: Raila Odinga presided over "government to government
The report by Newstime Africa, was compiled mainly with excerpts taken from the article filed on the Kenyan Standard Media Newspaper
© 2013, Newstime Africa. All rights reserved. Newstime Africa content cannot be reproduced in any form – electronic or print – without prior consent of the Publishers. Copyright infringement will be pursued and perpetrators prosecuted.
