|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Mar 17, 2012 23:18:37 GMT 3
Nowayhaha,
I love Martha Karua's position because it helps Kenyans realize that there is no difference between the positions taken by the two principals only that, one of the principals is forthright about his position while the other wants to have it both ways.
Kenyans should never forget that ODM is majority party in parliament and would have made a December election a reality in a day if they wanted to. They only needed to support the cabinet position through Mutala Kilonzo's bill in parliament.
If they missed that opportunity, they can still take it up as a party and bring it on the floor of the house through a member. It will still achieve the same result without the many pitfalls facing us at the moment.
Being majority in bunge should be understood to not only mean positions in government, but leading the legislative agenda too. This is the time to lead on that front, that is what Martha is saying here.
For now, let no one cheat you that courts can fix us an election date in December. That is a WHITE LIE. On what basis or legal backing would they do that?
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 17, 2012 23:19:42 GMT 3
An ODM walkout from the GCG will not work. In fact that will give Kibaki free hand in what he wants. If ODM walkout Kibaki can simply fill in the vacant slots or limp through with half a government as he was prepared to do in 2008: 1) Kibaki sworn in December 30, 2007 2) Kibaki appoints PNU half of cabinet in January 8, 2008 3) MP's sworn in January 15, 2008 4) GCG sworn in April 17, 2008 Looking at the above timeline, there's very little difference between ODM refusing to negotiate (read kowtow) & accept their appointments through Kibaki in 2008 or ODM storming out of the GCG after refusing to co-operate with him in 2012. Note how we had a semblance of government for 3 & a half months before the GCG was born. A walkout now will result in a similar PNU only government. Since Nyon'go has made it clear ODM will not walkout (meaning Raila will not get the NEC's approval to leave the GCG) it only leaves either dissolution of parliament (highly unlikely) or a written agreement between the 2 principals to dissolve the NARA. I saw Ruto & Kalonzo are ok with December elections. Uhuru may be as well although his mind is set on ICC. The easiest thing will be to mobilize a public outcry for elections in December until Kibaki will have no option but to give the people what they want....to see the back of him & his bloated government.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2012 1:53:43 GMT 3
Nowayhaha,I love Martha Karua's position because it helps Kenyans realize that there is no difference between the positions taken by the two principals only that, one of the principals is forthright about his position while the other wants to have it both ways. Kenyans should never forget that ODM is majority party in parliament and would have made a December election a reality in a day if they wanted to. They only needed to support the cabinet position through Mutala Kilonzo's bill in parliament. If they missed that opportunity, they can still take it up as a party and bring it on the floor of the house through a member. It will still achieve the same result without the many pitfalls facing us at the moment. Being majority in bunge should be understood to not only mean positions in government, but leading the legislative agenda too. This is the time to lead on that front, that is what Martha is saying here. For now, let no one cheat you that courts can fix us an election date in December. That is a WHITE LIE. On what basis or legal backing would they do that? mwalimumkuuI hope you can love Martha Karua's position here too!
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Mar 18, 2012 3:54:39 GMT 3
Nowayhaha,I love Martha Karua's position because it helps Kenyans realize that there is no difference between the positions taken by the two principals only that, one of the principals is forthright about his position while the other wants to have it both ways. Kenyans should never forget that ODM is majority party in parliament and would have made a December election a reality in a day if they wanted to. They only needed to support the cabinet position through Mutala Kilonzo's bill in parliament. If they missed that opportunity, they can still take it up as a party and bring it on the floor of the house through a member. It will still achieve the same result without the many pitfalls facing us at the moment. Being majority in bunge should be understood to not only mean positions in government, but leading the legislative agenda too. This is the time to lead on that front, that is what Martha is saying here. For now, let no one cheat you that courts can fix us an election date in December. That is a WHITE LIE. On what basis or legal backing would they do that? mwalimumkuuI hope you can love Martha Karua's position here too! She is obviously asking the right questions, but she gets all wrong when she tries to tie IEBC to Kibaki. I find that to be dishonest especially coming from her. You see, Martha Karua is not another Kathure or Akinyi, no. Martha is a member of parliament and a party leader at that. They had the opportunity to do the right thing, they refused. What IEBC has done is to take the last and only option available to them. Instead of holding press conferences blaming everyone in town, they should redraft the bill and have it passed, to anchor the new date in the constitution and see whether Hassan will say no to it. If there is anyone in that clip who put it as it is, its the Bishop, she of the glory. None of these MPs including the PM and the president is for December elections. Don't take them on their baraza talk but on their actions.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 18, 2012 8:40:19 GMT 3
Mwalimumkuu, just an observation on the Mutula bill you keep referring to. If memory serves, Mutula's goal was to amend ALL general elections to be held in December as opposed to August. If that's the bill he is shelving, then good riddance to bad rubbish.
What he should've brought to the table was a bill amending only the 2012 polls to December but leaving all future ones to the second Tuesday in August. I bet you that would get broader support from not only ODM but even the likes of Ruto who have called for elections to be held in December this year.
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Mar 18, 2012 15:00:28 GMT 3
Mwalimumkuu, just an observation on the Mutula bill you keep referring to. If memory serves, Mutula's goal was to amend ALL general elections to be held in December as opposed to August. If that's the bill he is shelving, then good riddance to bad rubbish. What he should've brought to the table was a bill amending only the 2012 polls to December but leaving all future ones to the second Tuesday in August. I bet you that would get broader support from not only ODM but even the likes of Ruto who have called for elections to be held in December this year. B6K, Surely that cannot be an excuse by these MPs and party leaders. Bills are normally amended on the floor of the house to give them the shape and nature that the MPs prefer. This is a case where none of them wanted anything to do with especially after the court gave the March 2013 possibility. And I keep on asking myself, why December a, date that is not supported by any law? Why not August as stipulated in the constitution? Why stick on such a controversial date? Because they know it is not possible, but they want to cheat Kenyans. You can clearly see the hypocricy.
|
|
|
Post by adongo23456 on Mar 18, 2012 15:29:15 GMT 3
The IEBC made a political decision. They will have to live with it. I think it is time to remove "Independent" from the IEBC. This is a new ECK with more money. The most important asset the IEBC needs is credibility. They blow that up, they will have nothing left. Right now it looks obvious the "EBC" has to do what Kibaki wants. The country means nothing to them. We don't know who they will work for tomorrow after Kibaki is gone but they are certainly not independent. Here we go: www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Lobbyists+fault+IEBC+call+for+December+polls/-/1064/1368662/-/cysxdo/-/index.html
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Mar 18, 2012 15:56:13 GMT 3
The IEBC made a political decision. They will have to live with it. I think it is time to remove "Independent" from the IEBC. This is a new ECK with more money. The most important asset the IEBC needs is credibility. They blow that up, they will have nothing left. Right now it looks obvious the "EBC" has to do what Kibaki wants. The country means nothing to them. We don't know who they will work for tomorrow after Kibaki is gone but they are certainly not independent. Here we go: www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Lobbyists+fault+IEBC+call+for+December+polls/-/1064/1368662/-/cysxdo/-/index.htmlYou maybe right, the,political decision was to take away the so called 'secret weapon'. That is why your friends in the civil society are mad. The principals were doing nothing but engaging Kenyans in their own childish games. They wanted to run in circles and have the elections whenever they deemed fit. Not in the new Kenya, am sorry. The opportunity for more games is now gone, we either change the date now through bunge or vote on March 4. Its that simple, IEBC took the bull by the horns for the sake of the country, and Kenyans of good will protect IEBC for that.
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 18, 2012 16:17:21 GMT 3
The IEBC made a political decision. They will have to live with it. I think it is time to remove "Independent" from the IEBC. This is a new ECK with more money. The most important asset the IEBC needs is credibility. They blow that up, they will have nothing left. Right now it looks obvious the "EBC" has to do what Kibaki wants. The country means nothing to them. We don't know who they will work for tomorrow after Kibaki is gone but they are certainly not independent. Here we go: www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Lobbyists+fault+IEBC+call+for+December+polls/-/1064/1368662/-/cysxdo/-/index.htmlODM has been petitioning the IEBC to act on political prostitutes who are elected by one party but defect to another party without the moral conviction to resign. The IEBC (the registrar of parties is a part of IEBC) has been toothless. Instead acting on political considerations in the case of the ODM nominated councillors. The setting of an elections date was another test of independence. They have failed. At the very minimum IEBC should have read the mood of the country and acted accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 18, 2012 16:22:45 GMT 3
The IEBC made a political decision. They will have to live with it. I think it is time to remove "Independent" from the IEBC. This is a new ECK with more money. The most important asset the IEBC needs is credibility. They blow that up, they will have nothing left. Right now it looks obvious the "EBC" has to do what Kibaki wants. The country means nothing to them. We don't know who they will work for tomorrow after Kibaki is gone but they are certainly not independent. Here we go: www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Lobbyists+fault+IEBC+call+for+December+polls/-/1064/1368662/-/cysxdo/-/index.htmlYou maybe right, the, political decision was to take away the so called 'secret weapon'. That is why your friends in the civil society are mad. The principals were doing nothing but engaging Kenyans in their own childish games. They wanted to run in circles and have the elections whenever they deemed fit. Not in the Kenya, am sorry. The opportunity for more games is now gone, we either change the date now through bunge or vote on March 4. Its that simple, IEBC took the bull by the horns for the sake of the country, and Kenyans of good will protect IEBC for that.The political decision was for the IEBC to announce the date that was preferred by one principal. That is what you are NOT saying. As it is the IEBC may have added fuel to a smouldering fire. This decision, and how it was taken has little to do with the 'sake of Kenyans'
|
|
|
Post by nereah on Mar 18, 2012 16:34:24 GMT 3
. Different routes same destination -the ball should be on ODMs court if they are that serious to have a Dec-2012 general election they should start the process rather than hoodwinking Kenyans but then again O.D.M. is just another ordinary Kenyan party ........................... nowayhaha, where did you get that? toa hiyo i say.
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Mar 18, 2012 17:17:39 GMT 3
You maybe right, the, political decision was to take away the so called 'secret weapon'. That is why your friends in the civil society are mad. The principals were doing nothing but engaging Kenyans in their own childish games. They wanted to run in circles and have the elections whenever they deemed fit. Not in the Kenya, am sorry. The opportunity for more games is now gone, we either change the date now through bunge or vote on March 4. Its that simple, IEBC took the bull by the horns for the sake of the country, and Kenyans of good will protect IEBC for that.The political decision was for the IEBC to announce the date that was preferred by one principal. That is what you are NOT saying. As it is the IEBC may have added fuel to a smouldering fire. This decision, and how it was taken has little to do with the 'sake of Kenyans' My friend public mood is indefensible in law. Ever asked yourself why the high court never gave us the December date despite the public mood? If by any stretch of imagination IEBC seemed to side with one principal, that can only be a demonstration of which of the two principals is on the side of the law and which one is for the rule of the jungle.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 18, 2012 21:08:51 GMT 3
B6K, Surely that cannot be an excuse by these MPs and party leaders. Bills are normally amended on the floor of the house to give them the shape and nature that the MPs prefer. This is a case where none of them wanted anything to do with especially after the court gave the March 2013 possibility. And I keep on asking myself, why December a, date that is not supported by any law? Why not August as stipulated in the constitution? Why stick on such a controversial date? Because they know it is not possible, but they want to cheat Kenyans. You can clearly see the hypocricy. The process of appointing the IEBC team was delayed to the point when they were eventually set up, their first act was to announce they couldn't hold elections in August as per the constitution. They were the first to propose the traditional December date as doable. Are they taking us all for a ride? Possibly. However the option of the principals dissolving NARA still remains doable provided they get a clear signal this is what the people want. 2012 will be the year of strikes.
|
|
|
Post by KOLONEL BRISK on Mar 18, 2012 23:10:34 GMT 3
www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Kenya+polls+team+sets+alternative+date+/-/1064/1369008/-/4pgtk6/-/index.htmlKenya polls team sets alternative date By OLIVER MATHENGE omathenge@ke.nationmedia.com Posted Sunday, March 18 2012 at 22:30 The electoral team has set December 17 as an alternative date if it is forced by either arms of the government to reverse its decision to hold the General Election on March 4, 2013. Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission acting chief executive officer James Oswago on Sunday challenged the Executive, the Judiciary and Parliament to set the election date in law to deal with the ambiguity that has been created by the Constitution and the court. He, however, revealed that the commission had an “election operation plan” that could see the polls being held on December 17. “The chairman already said that we are ready to abide by any ruling that will come from the Court of Appeal that says that we set a different date. “Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary should put their heads together and give us a clear date and we will abide by it,” Mr Oswago said during a talk show on Capital FM. On Saturday, chairman Issack Hassan said that they would change the date if the Court of Appeal does not uphold the Constitutional Court ruling, on which they set the date that has been received with mixed reactions. “We can reverse this date if we are given the right direction. If we are asked to pick an election date in December we can do it,” Mr Oswago said. He said that they decided on the March date because as far as the commission was concerned, the ruling by the Constitutional court had not been stayed or reversed. He added that the commission could not consult forever while there were a lot of issues that must be resolved before the elections are held. “You do not leave a void and when it is filled you start to complain about it. An election date is key to the planning of the election,” Mr Oswago said. His comments came as it emerged that two new laws could have pushed Kenya to a 2013 General Election. The IEBC estimates that parties need at least seven and a half months from end of April to comply with the Political Parties Act and the Elections Act before elections can be held. This pushes the complete compliance with the laws to mid-December this year. Mr Hassan noted that only five political parties had met the requirement of Political Parties Act.
|
|
|
Post by mank on Mar 18, 2012 23:27:55 GMT 3
Long time ago some of us analyzed the constitution and found not support for elections in 2012. I do not think IEBC or even courts can change that.
It is interesting therefore that charter boxes on this issue allege that pointing at 2013 for elections is advocacy for breach of the law - they just aren't reading that law!
|
|
|
Post by mwalimumkuu on Mar 18, 2012 23:34:59 GMT 3
Long time ago some of us analyzed the constitution and found not support for elections in 2012. I do not think IEBC or even courts can change that. It is interesting therefore that charter boxes on this issue allege that pointing at 2013 for elections is advocacy for breach of the law - they just aren't reading that law! I totally agree, the only way elections can be held in 2012 is by overthrowing the constitution as a section of ODM seems to be advocating for. One can only wonder why we have laws if this is the way things are to be done. Kanjama here agrees in total too and even exposes another landmine in settling for December 2012.
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Mar 19, 2012 1:53:24 GMT 3
. Different routes same destination -the ball should be on ODMs court if they are that serious to have a Dec-2012 general election they should start the process rather than hoodwinking Kenyans but then again O.D.M. is just another ordinary Kenyan party ........................... nowayhaha, where did you get that? toa hiyo i say. Nereah and Adongo, A second high profile lawyer after Martha Karua and infact the present LSK chairman emphasizing that should Raila walk out of the coalition then it will lead off to an elections within 3 months. Law Society of Kenya chairman Erick Mutua supported IEBC saying the electoral body had complied with the High Court directive. He, however, warned that should Raila’s party walk out of the coalition, then elections must be held after three months. www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=2000054367&cid=4¤tPage=3Narc Kenya presidential aspirant Martha Karua challenged Mr Odinga to trigger an early election by pulling out of the Coalition Government in accordance with Article 6 of the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. “If the PM is serious about having elections in December, let him pull out of the government by October,” she said. Article 6 of the National Accord and Reconciliation Act says the coalition will stand dissolved if one of the coalition partners withdraws from the coalition by a resolution of its highest decision making organ. www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/ODM+ministers+differ+with+Raila++/-/1064/1369014/-/110pwvl/-/index.html
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 19, 2012 9:48:11 GMT 3
A good constitution rarely should generate so much heat for nothing. We started off with a bad document and we should not be kicking ourselves today!
However one looks at it, intepretation of the law to suit the circumstances of the day is plainly wrong. The disolution of the coalition just means that the two parties shall part ways. If Kibaki already was in government and was joined in coalition by ODM, then if the coalition is dissolved, it will (technically) leave Kibaki with a minority in parliament and the dissolution of parliament is not activated by such a minority.
So from both a legal and a commonsense point of view, Raila leaving the coalition will only lead to loss of perks as PM - and knowing the jamaa, that is not an option! In any case the GCG was a creation of parties supportign ODM and PNU and hence anyone not in the grouping cannot be subjected to any sweetheart deals between Kibaki and Raila - in this case read Jirongo and his KADDU party where he is the only opposition MP in the house.
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 10:50:11 GMT 3
A good constitution rarely should generate so much heat for nothing. We started off with a bad document and we should not be kicking ourselves today! Are you talking about the whole constitution or the lack of clarity in transitional clauses regarding the date of the elections? Please, do not jump into conclusions because of teething problems. This constitution is good. It has expanded a lot of political, economic and social space and will trigger economic take off when it is implemented in 2012. This is your interpretation. For whatever it is worth, several lawyers disagree, including the indomitable Martha Karua, who not only represented PNU in negotiating those agreements but became its Minister for Justice and Constitutional Matters. Law is interpreted to sort out circumstances of the day. In fact that is the deeper meaning of the word 'interpret'. Kamale, do not delude yourself. Presidents (principals in our case) have always dissolved parliaments and called for elections in many democracies irrespective and regardless of all other political parties in the parliament. But - and this is important - a March election probably favours ODM more than anybody else. But it is simply not right from both a 'legal and a commonsense point of view'. I understand that leaders are not always appreciated for what they are: but most people appreciate that the person you derogatorily refer to as 'jamaa' actually burns the mid-night oil working for this country. If only tribal lenses were not so blinding, you might show some of Tina Turner's R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
|
|
|
Post by ebarasi on Mar 19, 2012 11:28:31 GMT 3
A good constitution rarely should generate so much heat for nothing. We started off with a bad document and we should not be kicking ourselves today! However one looks at it, intepretation of the law to suit the circumstances of the day is plainly wrong. The disolution of the coalition just means that the two parties shall part ways. If Kibaki already was in government and was joined in coalition by ODM, then if the coalition is dissolved, it will (technically) leave Kibaki with a minority in parliament and the dissolution of parliament is not activated by such a minority. So from both a legal and a commonsense point of view, Raila leaving the coalition will only lead to loss of perks as PM - and knowing the jamaa, that is not an option! In any case the GCG was a creation of parties supportign ODM and PNU and hence anyone not in the grouping cannot be subjected to any sweetheart deals between Kibaki and Raila - in this case read Jirongo and his KADDU party where he is the only opposition MP in the house. Kamalet, A blunt NO. It is not the constitution that is the problem here. Is the bible a perfect book? No. But it has been used under millennia as a moral compass. I put it to you that dereliction of duty and dishonest intentions is what is biting us now. We have to watch out for politicians and the status quo that seek to play the game on the fringes. What is so hard about putting the country first for once? However, all things under the sky eventually come to pass and so will this forced marriage that is the GCG. If the marriage ends in acrimony one wonders what the fallout will look like?
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 19, 2012 12:16:07 GMT 3
A good constitution rarely should generate so much heat for nothing. We started off with a bad document and we should not be kicking ourselves today! Are you talking about the whole constitution or the lack of clarity in transitional clauses regarding the date of the elections? Please, do not jump into conclusions because of teething problems. This constitution is good. It has expanded a lot of political, economic and social space and will trigger economic take off when it is implemented in 2012. This is your interpretation. For whatever it is worth, several lawyers disagree, including the indomitable Martha Karua, who not only represented PNU in negotiating those agreements but became its Minister for Justice and Constitutional Matters. Law is interpreted to sort out circumstances of the day. In fact that is the deeper meaning of the word 'interpret'. Kamale, do not delude yourself. Presidents (principals in our case) have always dissolved parliaments and called for elections in many democracies irrespective and regardless of all other political parties in the parliament. But - and this is important - a March election probably favours ODM more than anybody else. But it is simply not right from both a 'legal and a commonsense point of view'. I understand that leaders are not always appreciated for what they are: but most people appreciate that the person you derogatorily refer to as 'jamaa' actually burns the mid-night oil working for this country. If only tribal lenses were not so blinding, you might show some of Tina Turner's R.E.S.P.E.C.T. RR It is not just the transitional clauses that are a pain. How about resolving the gender representation issue in Parliament? That is not a transition issue...it is in the main document mate. We actually could go through a lot more....which make it not a good document!
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 19, 2012 14:27:13 GMT 3
RR It is not just the transitional clauses that are a pain. How about resolving the gender representation issue in Parliament? That is not a transition issue...it is in the main document mate. We actually could go through a lot more....which make it not a good document! Kamale; I will GIVE you this: the constitution is NOT perfect. It will improve with practice. But it is NOT bad. Part of its GOODNESS is that it realises it is not PERFECT and has mechanisms for amending it. But those mechanisms are such that you cannot easily play political poker with our Katiba. It is a MILLION times better than the one we threw out. We will remain vigilant against watermelons in our midst.
|
|