Of court cases,appeals and counter appeals

[omundustrong]

In simple logic,the first person to go to court is assumed to be aggrieved by a decision,a person or an organisation and thinks by going to court he or she will get a reprieve.What follows in court is then arguments for or against the decision.In an ideal situation you would expect a decision purely based on arguments presented to be the guiding principles,however,as so often happens,we live in a society that is polarised and politicised to the core.Sometimes the rulings do not make sense or make sense depending on which side you belong.When the aggrieved party feels not satisfied by the decision of the lower court,they are free to appeal the decision in the upper courts,here it is again assumed that the bench will consist of men ad women of great wisdom.The decision arrived here can still be challenged at the highest court in the land.The accused party also has a right to appeal to the highest court depending of the issue being litigated.

Now the big question is?In whose interests have we seen the many court cases and counter appeals against the IEBC?What does it say about the independence of our courts when one decision by one bench is totally trashed by another higher bench?Are we reading the same constitution or we interpret it to suit our political leanings?Finally the big question is?Are our courts political courts or are they independent?The jury is out there on these questions?I wont pretend to know the answers but 8th August 2017 will answer some of these questions.

Admin pardon me if this topic has been explored elsewhere but i have been away from the forum for a long time but always a loyal member.In the spirit of the land of mulembe we believe in greetings,happy to touch base with my seniors Jakaswanga,Mwalimu,Kamalet,Admin.

[kamalet]

Jul 21, 2017 10:32:31 GMT 3 omundustrong said:

In simple logic,the first person to go to court is assumed to be aggrieved by a decision,a person or an organisation and thinks by going to court he or she will get a reprieve.What follows in court is then arguments for or against the decision.In an ideal situation you would expect a decision purely based on arguments presented to be the guiding principles,however,as so often happens,we live in a society that is polarised and politicised to the core.Sometimes the rulings do not make sense or make sense depending on which side you belong.When the aggrieved party feels not satisfied by the decision of the lower court,they are free to appeal the decision in the upper courts,here it is again assumed that the bench will consist of men ad women of great wisdom.The decision arrived here can still be challenged at the highest court in the land.The accused party also has a right to appeal to the highest court depending of the issue being litigated.

Now the big question is?In whose interests have we seen the many court cases and counter appeals against the IEBC?What does it say about the independence of our courts when one decision by one bench is totally trashed by another higher bench?Are we reading the same constitution or we interpret it to suit our political leanings?Finally the big question is?Are our courts political courts or are they independent?The jury is out there on these questions?I wont pretend to know the answers but 8th August 2017 will answer some of these questions.

Admin pardon me if this topic has been explored elsewhere but i have been away from the forum for a long time but always a loyal member.In the spirit of the land of mulembe we believe in greetings,happy to touch base with my seniors Jakaswanga,Mwalimu,Kamalet,Admin.

Going through some of the proclamations by our learned judges, I get more and more convinced that the bench is the resting place for incompetent lawyers who could never make it at the bar! If you look at the ruling by the high court on the presidential ballot, there some really ludicrous statements by the judges and the ruling itself was just something out of tv show on pranks! The ruling by the court of appeal attempted to bring back a level of sanity - but did they have to?

On the question of independence of the judiciary, I think we are still stuck in the Moi era days of security of tenure for judges where their independence was ever threatened despite being an arm of government as we were taught in our old civics classes in primary school The new constitution clearly states the three arms of government through which citizens exercise their sovereign power. None of the arms of government is more independent than the other so just as we can criticise Duale and Muturi as well as Uhuru and Ruto, we MUST also criticise anything Maraga and Odunga say! That is how we exercise our sovereign power by holding each arm of government to account!!