|
|
Post by Horth on Mar 12, 2013 18:22:35 GMT 3
CORD PRESS STATEMENT - We would like to draw the country’s attention to the following: 1. IEBC is currently running advertisements on media asking Kenyans to accept the results of the elections held last week. We would like to reiterate that the right to petition an election result is constitutionally guaranteed. IEBC as the institution whose deficiencies are subject of such challenges cannot therefore purport to ask the public to accept the election results as that is tantamount to violation of the democratic rights. We demand that the IEBC stop these advertisements forthwith. 2. As CORD prepares to file the petition against the presidential results, our candidate has made concrete assurances to the public that he will respect and uphold the decision of the Supreme Court on this matter. We hereby ask the Jubilee Alliance to issue a similar assurance to Kenyans. 3. We are concerned at attempts by sections of government to create the impression that the election is over and done with. We would like to inform the government, our supporters and Kenyans in general that the process of filing a petition is part and parcel of the election process and urge the government to respect this process and stop any provocative actions that could undermine the process and prevailing peace in the country. 4. Note that the Coalition government is still in place until the next President is sworn in, which will be clear when the petition to be filed within the constitutional timeline has been determined by the Supreme Court. For CORD COMMUNICATION TEAM Hon James Orengo Hon Mutula Kilonzo Now is when I'm beginning to believe what a few friends have been trying to convince me. CORD has absolutely no case and they know it. |
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 238
|
Post by bob on Mar 12, 2013 18:36:09 GMT 3
CORD PRESS STATEMENT - We would like to draw the country’s attention to the following: 1. IEBC is currently running advertisements on media asking Kenyans to accept the results of the elections held last week. We would like to reiterate that the right to petition an election result is constitutionally guaranteed. IEBC as the institution whose deficiencies are subject of such challenges cannot therefore purport to ask the public to accept the election results as that is tantamount to violation of the democratic rights. We demand that the IEBC stop these advertisements forthwith. 2. As CORD prepares to file the petition against the presidential results, our candidate has made concrete assurances to the public that he will respect and uphold the decision of the Supreme Court on this matter. We hereby ask the Jubilee Alliance to issue a similar assurance to Kenyans. 3. We are concerned at attempts by sections of government to create the impression that the election is over and done with. We would like to inform the government, our supporters and Kenyans in general that the process of filing a petition is part and parcel of the election process and urge the government to respect this process and stop any provocative actions that could undermine the process and prevailing peace in the country. 4. Note that the Coalition government is still in place until the next President is sworn in, which will be clear when the petition to be filed within the constitutional timeline has been determined by the Supreme Court. For CORD COMMUNICATION TEAM Hon James Orengo Hon Mutula Kilonzo Now is when I'm beginning to believe what a few friends have been trying to convince me. CORD has absolutely no case and they know it. Why is this petition so irritating to some that you can hardly wait for the due process to take its own course. Off course if they CORD have no case it will be definitely be dismissed with cost. Is that to much to ask for the Kenyan people? After all the constitution was meant for us all & as law abiding citizens cord has follwed that due process not any other. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 12, 2013 18:50:20 GMT 3
KamaletYour Raila phobia is getting the better of you! The matter is before the Court where two Respondents have been asked to furnish the Claimant and the Court with further information. This are fundamental information to help move forward the case and help inform the Court on forming a view. The Court will stay the matter until that information is provided. So stop this jua kali nonsense on time barred! Time does not run until the Court determines this matter. I doubt if the Court will entertain your bizarre logic the presidential petition is time-barred on the upuzi reasons you give. I have remain hushed waiting for the Court, however each day which passes I gain new insight into the case, especially from the CORD angle - it looks pretty tight but I would not speculate. I trust the respected Senior Counsels (SC) running CORD case are not fools to back it in the Court, where there is tangible and probative evidence to support their stance. Further insight into this case. The application at the high court was pursuant to Freedom of Information as enshrined in the constitution. So despite the application being certified as urgent and to be heard tomorrow, the advocates of Safaricom and IEBC (and I HOPE THEY DO NOT) could easily ask for an adjournment to allow them study the petition and suitably respond. Lenaola then gives them upto Friday to do so and the hearing is held then on that day. Depending on the diligence of the judges, they could rule that day for the information to be provided. Safaricom and IEBC then say it will take them at least 2 days to provide the information since they cannot act until they are ordered to do so in a decision. So come Monday and the Election Petition on the presidential election would have been timebarred under the constitution if by then Cord will not have filed it awaiting this "key evidence". I trust and hope this is not the route that Cord wants to take to support its petition. Sadik It is not about Kamale and Raila, so let us stick to the topic. If wish to check the application seeking the information is in the High Court. Presidential petitions are exclusively heard by the Supreme Court. My very simple argument was that time wasted in thenHigh Court cannot be cured as there is a specific constitutional requirement to file a petition within seven days. The application at the High Court court cannot delay the requirement of the constitution that was my argument. As to the tightness of the evidence, I frankly cannot wait to see it. And for the sake of the Cord supporters it better not turn out to be similar to that,of Ocampo. |
|
|
|
Post by cheshirecat on Mar 12, 2013 20:18:05 GMT 3
Well, at this rate, they seem to be doing everything BUT petition. Just like the miguna lawsuits that were threatened for months but never actually materialized,
I think this is just meant to keep the long suffering Cord faithful tagging along.
Pass me the popcorn please. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Mar 12, 2013 20:49:41 GMT 3
KamaletAll along, I have stuck to the topic. CORD lawyers are doing well. I think they should go further and seek to conduct digital forensics on both the software and hardware used by the IEBC to determine if they followed basic rules in systems deployment and management. It seems to me that the election was won on data that is alleged lacked integrity - that integrity of data depended on the service providers and the users, Safaricom and IEBC to demonstratively provide. That is because Kenyans trusted them to deliver where the services rendered and tools used were acquired by taxpayers money and should be made available upon request. It seems to me there are plausible logistical problems with the BVR kits and to my knowledge, the aggrieved party (here CORD) has a right to seek legal redress, it is called due process and the law obliges both IEBC and Safaricom to provide them. Thus, Cord are within their rights to know the truth. If there was no foul play, Jubilee or IEBC needs to fear nothing. If anything Cord will then embarrassing themselves. Why, pray, is IEBC refusing to release vital election instruments? The reluctance to avail the documents worries me. In other countries, election outcomes and all pertinent documentations are made available for all to see immediately the results are declared. The Electoral body being the sole custodian of the requisite back up information should simply provide as requested. The information cord wants is to help know the truth If the process was free, fair and credible, why is IEBC withholding those documents required by CORD? It will be a total shame when the Supreme Court nullifies Uhuruto win. In Today's Nation Jaindi Kisero, a columnist who has earned respect for his sobriety said, "At around midnight, Commissioner Yusuf Nzibo came to the podium to announce that the commission had concluded announcements for that day.
He said that tallying had temporarily been suspended to allow political party agents to scrutinise documents.
The final announcements and tallying, he added, would be made at 11am the following day.
NTV’s Linus Kaikai, who was anchoring a show that was more or less playing the role of watchdog on the tallying process, crunching the numbers to interrogate whether Mr Uhuru Kenyatta would hit the 50 per cent threshold of all votes cast, decided it was time to go to sleep.
“Gentlemen”, he told the guests on the programme, “we have an early night”. He promised viewers that programming would resume the following day in line with the announcement by Mr Nzibo.
Meanwhile, the live feed from the tallying centre was left to continue running on the screen.
As it turned out, Mr Kaikai was wrong. A few hours after the watchdogs had gone to sleep, another commissioner, completely out of the blue, and without making reference to what Dr Nzibo had said, came on and started announcing other results.
The numbers were hurriedly tallied and new results showing that Mr Kenyatta had surpassed the 50 per cent threshold were transmitted to the live feed around 2am.
Did Mr Nzibo tell us a lie or was he countermanded? If he deliberately lied to the public, he must be held to account." .... www.nation.co.ke/blogs/IEBC-must-explain/-/446696/1718430/-/view/asBlogPost/-/wn14j1z/-/index.htmlKamaletYour Raila phobia is getting the better of you! The matter is before the Court where two Respondents have been asked to furnish the Claimant and the Court with further information. This are fundamental information to help move forward the case and help inform the Court on forming a view. The Court will stay the matter until that information is provided. So stop this jua kali nonsense on time barred! Time does not run until the Court determines this matter. I doubt if the Court will entertain your bizarre logic the presidential petition is time-barred on the upuzi reasons you give. I have remain hushed waiting for the Court, however each day which passes I gain new insight into the case, especially from the CORD angle - it looks pretty tight but I would not speculate. I trust the respected Senior Counsels (SC) running CORD case are not fools to back it in the Court, where there is tangible and probative evidence to support their stance. Sadik It is not about Kamale and Raila, so let us stick to the topic. If wish to check the application seeking the information is in the High Court. Presidential petitions are exclusively heard by the Supreme Court. My very simple argument was that time wasted in thenHigh Court cannot be cured as there is a specific constitutional requirement to file a petition within seven days. The application at the High Court court cannot delay the requirement of the constitution that was my argument. As to the tightness of the evidence, I frankly cannot wait to see it. And for the sake of the Cord supporters it better not turn out to be similar to that,of Ocampo.
|
|
euonyi
Full Member
Me, myself and I
Posts: 179
|
Post by euonyi on Mar 12, 2013 21:41:10 GMT 3
As someone so ably points out:
KIBAKI complained about rigged polls in 1988,1992 & 1997. MATIBA in 1988 & 1992.
Why is Raila wrong in simply following what is his democratic right? Is it that unlike Kibaki and Matiba he has the real possibility of going to court?
I think there are comments here that should be carved in stone tablets and we see whether the ones complaining so loudly about Raila going to court would do the same once details start coming out of the petition to be presented in the Supreme Court.
By the way, one thing this particular election has revealed is that it is difficult to imagine where Kibaki got the numbers claimed in the previous election in 2007! Let us leave that analysis for another day, in the same way as this so called majority in the National Assembly houses will also come tumbling down once the SC has ruled on this case, whichever the outcome. Watch this space.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 12, 2013 21:46:27 GMT 3
Sadik
With respect, I would like you to refer t the constitution on the timelines defined as well as the Supreme Court rules and then tell me how you reconcile this attempt at going to the high court to seek out evidence that they do not have so that they can include it in their petition. What I was also alluding to is the possibility of mischief from both the IEBC and Safaricom in delaying to get the information to Cord to the extent of compromising the timing provided for in the constitution.
I am certain you know about the requirement of the constitution with regard to petitions.
|
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Mar 12, 2013 23:05:47 GMT 3
" I have seen a letter showing how, hardly 10 days before the General Election, the Safaricom CEO, Mr Bob Collymore, threatened to pull out of the deal with the IEBC, listing issues, which, he said, “could seriously compromise IEBC’s ability to execute credible elections”, and citing casualness on the part of top IEBC officials. Clearly, Collymore knew what he was talking about" Says Jaindi Kisero....
Check that Link provided by Sadik..
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 13, 2013 1:20:04 GMT 3
As someone so ably points out: KIBAKI complained about rigged polls in 1988,1992 & 1997. MATIBA in 1988 & 1992. Why is Raila wrong in simply following what is his democratic right? Is it that unlike Kibaki and Matiba he has the real possibility of going to court? I think there are comments here that should be carved in stone tablets and we see whether the ones complaining so loudly about Raila going to court would do the same once details start coming out of the petition to be presented in the Supreme Court. By the way, one thing this particular election has revealed is that it is difficult to imagine where Kibaki got the numbers claimed in the previous election in 2007! Let us leave that analysis for another day, in the same way as this so called majority in the National Assembly houses will also come tumbling down once the SC has ruled on this case, whichever the outcome. Watch this space. , ati Kibaki & Matiba complained in 1988? Really?!! When, pray tell, did Kibaki make his cutting a mugumo tree with a razor blade comment? When did he quit KANU to join DP?  |
|
|
|
Post by malkia on Mar 13, 2013 8:25:20 GMT 3
CORD must make a strategic decision to limit it's inquiry into the IEBC's actions and processes if they hope to prevail. While I think we could gain an enormous amount from a forensic audit it is highly unlikely we could get one done in the 14 days that the Supreme Court has to hear and decide the Presidential election petitions.
The biggest mistake the CORD legal team can make is to overload the Supreme Court with data and fail to hone in on 5-10 major issues which are then supported with some evidence (not everything they can throw at the court). I always worry when a legal team is full of the " who's who"- rarely do such teams work well together (egos, personal and work styles etc) and more importantly they tend to have multiple power centers which doesn't bode well for such a short and focused assignment as this which requires a clear strategy and focused execution. If I was advising CORD I would have picked less well known lawyers (excellent lawyers but people with something to prove and a name to make) and provided them with the advisory support of some of these legal titans.
It may be that this case, the one challenging the election of the President elect, will unearth the evidence that can support the prosecution of some IEBC officials and/or commissioners without yielding the desired result for CORD (invalidation of current election). This may be largely due to a lack of time to develop the case and analyze all the evidence. I hope the lawyers have prepared their clients for that possibility and have a team available to pursue the IEBC immediately after the Supreme Court case.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 13, 2013 8:56:28 GMT 3
CORD must make a strategic decision to limit it's inquiry into the IEBC's actions and processes if they hope to prevail. While I think we could gain an enormous amount from a forensic audit it is highly unlikely we could get one done in the 14 days that the Supreme Court has to hear and decide the Presidential election petitions. The biggest mistake the CORD legal team can make is to overload the Supreme Court with data and fail to hone in on 5-10 major issues which are then supported with some evidence (not everything they can throw at the court). I always worry when a legal team is full of the " who's who"- rarely do such teams work well together (egos, personal and work styles etc) and more importantly they tend to have multiple power centers which doesn't bode well for such a short and focused assignment as this which requires a clear strategy and focused execution. If I was advising CORD I would have picked less well known lawyers (excellent lawyers but people with something to prove and a name to make) and provided them with the advisory support of some of these legal titans. It may be that this case, the one challenging the election of the President elect, will unearth the evidence that can support the prosecution of some IEBC officials and/or commissioners without yielding the desired result for CORD (invalidation of current election). This may be largely due to a lack of time to develop the case and analyze all the evidence. I hope the lawyers have prepared their clients for that possibility and have a team available to pursue the IEBC immediately after the Supreme Court case. Exactly what I was saying!!! It is a petition not a judicial inquiry and time is of essence. |
|
|
|
Post by cheshirecat on Mar 13, 2013 9:14:00 GMT 3
I wonder how impartial Mutunga can be in this case?
NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — Confidence was so low in Kenya's courts after its 2007 election that people preferred to settle their disputes with machetes and bows and arrows. After this year's disputed presidential vote, there has been no violence, in part because of the faith the country has in its highest-ranking judge.
Chief Justice Willy Mutunga will soon preside over the biggest case of his short judicial career. Last weekend the country's election commission named Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta the winner of the March 4 presidential election with 50.07 percent of the vote.
Prime Minister Raila Odinga is challenging that result, saying there has been massive rigging. Odinga's camp said Tuesday that the prime minister was cheated out of 1.8 million votes, a margin that would give him an outright win.
The March 4 election was the first since postelection violence killed more than 1,000 people in 2007-08. This postelection period has not seen any violence. Odinga asked his supporters for calm, and Kenyans seem to have more faith in their government.
Mutunga on Monday said the election case would be heard "impartially, fairly justly and without fear, ill-will, prejudice or bias and in accordance with our constitution and our laws."
Mutunga's career as a social and political activist has placed him near Kenya's top politicians for decades, and he's shared his opinion on them. One quote from the 2006 book "Raila Odinga: An Enigma in Kenyan Politics" may become an issue for the case he soon presides over.
"I am convinced Kenya's transition needs Raila as the president of this country," author Babafemi A. Badejo quotes Mutunga as saying.
Mutunga has been "a committed activist in the pro-democracy movement in Kenya since the 1970s," according to a biography posted on a Kenyan government website.
Unlike other judges in Kenya, many who know Mutunga believe his independence is genuine, and is unlikely to be persuaded by bribes or threats. Mutuma Rutere, of the Nairobi-based Center for Human Rights and Policy Studies, said fairness is Mutunga's "biggest asset."
"There is enough evidence that he can be depended upon to preside over this issue in an independent manner," said Rutere, who worked with Mutunga at the Kenya Human Rights Commission. "His whole life has been about promoting justice and democracy."
Mutunga knows Odinga well. In the late 1970s, as former Kenyan President Daniel arap Moi consolidated his hold on power, Mutunga was jailed in 1982, the same year Odinga was detained for alleged treason. Later the two joined a pro-democracy group called the Young Turks.
In the book "Raila Odinga," Mutunga is quoted as saying Odinga "is a nationalist and a patriot. He has always struggled against dictatorship and oppression and been for social justice."
"Though it may sound contradictory, he is also an ethnic baron. He has not sorted out this contradiction in his life. He uses both nationalist and ethnic cards for the advancement of his political projects," the book quotes Mutunga as saying.
Kenya's 2010 constitution was passed in the wake of the 2007-08 tribal violence. It gives Odinga until Saturday to file his election petition and Mutunga's court two weeks to rule. Kenyatta cannot be sworn in until the case is closed.
On Tuesday, Odinga's team said it is seeking an order from Kenya's High Court to compel the election commission to produce electoral registrars and other documents used in the vote count. Odinga's team says the documents can help prove Odinga was cheated out of 1.8 million votes. It said the election commission is operating under a cloak of secrecy.
"This is a serious indictment on the integrity, ability and above all honesty of the" election commission, Education Minister Mutula Kilonzo said.
Though Mutunga has a reputation for fairness and independence, the Odinga case will present new, difficult tests in a country with a history of extra-judicial executions and unexplained disappearances. Even before Kenyans voted, a letter attributed to a violent gang circulated throughout the country warning of "dire consequences" if Kenyatta was blocked from running.
Kenyatta faces charges of crimes against humanity at The Hague-based International Criminal Court, and his eligibility to run for president was being tested in court.
"If anybody, any candidate, any party, any agency, or any other actor thinks that it will bend the ear, mind and resolve of this chief justice to do anything that is unconstitutional or illegal, then they are mistaken," Mutunga said in statement in February.
Mutunga, 65, was born into a poor family among the Kamba people of Kenya's eastern province and has degrees from universities in Kenya and Tanzania. He has taught constitutional law at the University of Nairobi. After his 1983 release from prison he went into exile in Canada, where he earned a doctorate in law at Toronto's York University.
He returned to Kenya in the early 1990s. Before being named chief justice, he had never been a judge. He has spoken out in defense of homosexuality in a deeply conservative society and is described as a proponent of "neoliberal" judicial reform. He wears a stud in his left ear, an item that became a publicly debated issue as he was named chief justice.
Out of 10 contenders for the job, Mutunga's name was the only one forwarded by the Judicial Service Commission to President Mwai Kibaki. Mutunga's appointment was approved by lawmakers in June 2011.
Gladwell Otieno of the Africa Center for Open Governance, a pro-democracy group in Nairobi, said Mutunga has been a good chief justice. She notes that he is one of only six justices, however. A seventh seat is vacant, opening the possibility of a split decision.
"Ever since he took over the judiciary public confidence has been rising steadily. It's quite high now," Otieno said. Odinga supporters "may expect him to rule in their favor... but he's not alone there and it depends on the quality of evidence they present."
___
Associated Press reporter Tom Odula in Nairobi, Kenya contributed to this report.
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 13, 2013 10:34:25 GMT 3
1.Safaricom objects to the CORD case seeking private and previleged information, citing that its against the Communication Acts and the constitution. CORD lawyer agrees to the objection and Judge Lenaola strikes out Safaricom from the suit.
2. Court directs all parties to first have an informal agreement out of the court with IEBC on the practicality of delivering the information cord is asking for . Cord is demanding more than half a million papers which both the IEBC, and IT experts agree would take more then 5 days to print/photocopy with high speed copiers/printers which are not in Kenya and will have to wait for procurement procedures which may take another week!
3. Both parties agree that Form 34,34,and 36 are material with party agents and its duplication of work to ask for them again.
I told you that the suit Cord is filing would be won by a Kenya school of Law student....
Court to resume at 11:30AM www.kenyanlist.com/kls-listing-show.php?id=116514Malkia warned that this route will not yield much.....and so did I!
|
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Mar 13, 2013 11:01:14 GMT 3
Malkia and Kamalet yesterday Cord issued this statement ..
1] “We are concerned at attempts by sections of government to create the impression that the election is over and done with.
2] We would like to inform the government, our supporters and Kenyans in general that the process OF FILING A PETITION IS PART AND PARCEL OF THE ELECTION PROCESS AND URGE THE GOVERNMENT TO RESPECT THIS PROCESS AND STOP ANY PROVOCATIVE ACTIONS THAT COULD UNDERMINE THE PROCESS AND PREVAILING PEACE IN THE COUNTRY,” .
3] “Note that the Coalition government is still in place until the next President is sworn in, which will be clear when the petition to be filed WITHIN THE CONSTITUTIONAL TIMELINE HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY THE SUPREME COURT.”
I am saying that the CORD TEAM took its time to write to supporters and Kenyans assuring them that ….The petition will be filed within the constitutional timeline…
and...
Odinga said on Saturday his CORD alliance and most Kenyans had faith in a reformed judiciary and HE WOULD ACCEPT THE SUPREME COURT'S RULING ON HIS PETITION…
• So two things are clear… the petition will be within the stipulated constitutional timeline and Cord will accept the decision of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
If you are a CORD supporter then you would take it that CORDs lawyers know what they are doing… if you are not, you would worry perhaps due to the fear of the unknown..
I take it that the expediency with which the Supreme Court handles this matter will be out of CORDS hands. But before them they will have all the necessary evidence and facts necessary for an informed decision. INCLUDING THIS ONE WITH SAFARI COM.
The high profiled Law team helps by giving CORDs the right image as to the seriousness of the matter at hand…[with due respect to many other great lawyers out there, like my friend Omwenga]
Chesirecat rhetorically wonders how impartial Mutunga can be in this case? That is a question on the mind of many Jubilee adherents…
The following words from Mutunga’s own mouth just this February makes this case rather uncomfortable for some..
"If anybody, any candidate, any party, any agency, or any other actor thinks that it will bend the ear, mind and resolve of this chief justice TO DO ANYTHING THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR ILLEGAL, then they are mistaken"
LET JUSTICE PREVAIL..
|
|
|
|
Post by cheshirecat on Mar 13, 2013 11:26:25 GMT 3
The following words from Mutunga’s own mouth just this February makes this case rather uncomfortable for some.. "If anybody, any candidate, any party, any agency, or any other actor thinks that it will bend the ear, mind and resolve of this chief justice TO DO ANYTHING THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR ILLEGAL, then they are mistaken"LET JUSTICE PREVAIL.. So we sit back and relax because he has said he will be impartial? Spare us please. it's in the public domain that he favors a Raila presidency (words from his own mouth too) and thus has no business being on that bench determining that case. So that justice is done, and seen to be done, Mutunga should do the honorable thing and step down from hearing that case. I dont know why you guys think that only cord deserves a fair and impartial hearing. Justice cuts both ways |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 13, 2013 12:02:34 GMT 3
So I am sitting watching the live court proceedings and I ask myself what the Cord lawyer is asking for and conceding to!!!
They demanded Form 35 and they have agreed to go to all the 290 constituencies to photocopy the forms as these apparently will not be moved away from the regions!!
On contracts, IEBC has no objection, but Cord will need to get permission from the other parties to disclose the agreements
The guy has agreed to await at least 2 days to get remaining serial numbers of 26,000 handheld devices that they want.
The guy has agreed to take a soft copy of the register that took IEBC 7 days to print!
Then they have to appear again before Lenaola on Friday for orders and declarations and this is ONE DAY before deadline for filing of Petition with the supreme court!!
Something is refusing to add up!
|
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Mar 13, 2013 12:08:42 GMT 3
Chesirecat I am of the view that a law abiding citizen has no reason fearing the law, for to him the law is a friend NOT an adversary...
Suppose a civilian of moral soundness and a thief are walking together on the same road....and they meet a policeman.... their internal configuration will process that encounter in very different ways..
to a civilian of moral soundness the police is not a threat, but to a thief thesame policeman strikes terror..
I have taken the words of Mutunga' to mean he will be impartial over this matter... and just like you, I therefore hope that the evidence before him will be the determinant factor in making his judgement and not his political persuasion... and he is not doing it alone..
He has said that the process will be out there in the public and the media... me and you will later debate on the merits and the demerits of the supreme court ruling...
Justice indeed cuts both ways.... one more thing, I am not at war with you....
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 13, 2013 12:24:44 GMT 3
I should have added that TNA/URP were enjoined in the application and have been given the same access to IEBC as has CORD.
Here is how it will be played dirty - TNA/URP will beat Cord to the documents and with slower photocopiers will keep their opponents waiting and with a good right to same orders from the court.
Considering how sloppy Cord has been during the campaign, this can be repeated over and over again where copies are to be made just to make sure they do not meet the Saturday deadline of their filings!
As Malkia said, Cord should not be on wild goose chase, get facts you can work with that prove your position within 3 days!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Mar 13, 2013 12:32:27 GMT 3
Kamalet you say that TNA/URP will beat Cord to the documents and with slower photocopiers will keep their opponents waiting and with a good right to same orders from the court...
Then you also say, this can be repeated over and over again where copies are to be made just to make sure they do not meet the Saturday deadline of their filings!
So my question to you is this... why would they want to do all that? Why would they want to play it dirty?
I would like to understand this line of arguement..
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 13, 2013 12:49:15 GMT 3
Kamalet you say that TNA/URP will beat Cord to the documents and with slower photocopiers will keep their opponents waiting and with a good right to same orders from the court... Then you also say, this can be repeated over and over again where copies are to be made just to make sure they do not meet the Saturday deadline of their filings!So my question to you is this... why would they want to do all that? Why would they want to play it dirty? I would like to understand this line of arguement.. Foresight Like anyone else, if they can get away without a court case - technically or otherwise - then the happier they will be. I do not think you can expect them to take somethings lying down! I am afraid but in love and war, all is fair! My expectation would have been for Cord to vehemently oppose the application from Katwa, but the Cord guy just sat there!! I have already said that he could not get a consent from IEBC and the only thing he took to court were unenforceable agreements which will be reviewed on Friday! Strange he could not even ask for tomorrow afternoon in the event he does not get all the cooperation he needs! |
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Mar 13, 2013 12:56:25 GMT 3
"If they can get away" technically or otherwise!  Kamalet, they aint gonna get away this time! |
|
|
|
Post by Horth on Mar 13, 2013 12:58:34 GMT 3
From twitter:
Capital FM Kenya @capitalfm_kenya 12:23 p.m. - Mar 13, 2013
Ukambani politicians led by ex-MP Philip Kaloki dissociate themselves from CORD petition against Uhuru; say ready to work with new regime
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 13, 2013 13:09:17 GMT 3
"If they can get away" technically or otherwise! Kamalet, they aint gonna get away this time! Frankly.... I hope they do not. It would such an anti-climax if we do not get to see our supreme court at work!! |
|
bob
Full Member
Posts: 238
|
Post by bob on Mar 13, 2013 13:58:17 GMT 3
There comes a time when a man has got to do what a man has got to do. Raila has chosen to walk that path,literary naked. Those whose chose to walk for him for political expendiency are slowly falling by the wayside history will judge the harshly. Politics is not for the kuku hearted.
|
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Mar 13, 2013 14:21:54 GMT 3
From twitter: Capital FM Kenya @capitalfm_kenya 12:23 p.m. - Mar 13, 2013 Ukambani politicians led by ex-MP Philip Kaloki dissociate themselves from CORD petition against Uhuru; say ready to work with new regime Wednesday March 13, 2013 - News just in indicates that top officials of Wiper Democratic Movement have dissociated themselves from the looming CORD petition, saying the just concluded elections were credible, free and fair. Wiper politicians led by former MP Philip Kaloki and Gideon Ndambuki have dissociated themselves from CORD petition against Uhuru saying they ready to work with the new government. In a press conference held at Ole Sereni Hotel in Nairobi on Wednesday, the Wiper leaders, who are close allies of Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka, requested their CORD partners to drop their petition since they don’t have watertight evidence. Ndambuki and Kaloki said CORD leaders should concede defeat since if there is a run-off, Jubilee Coalition will still win the election. In other news, rumour has it that Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka had a long telephone conversation with President –elect Uhuru Kenyatta and his Deputy William Ruto on Tuesday, over the possibility of forming a united government. Sources close to Kalonzo said, the three leaders scheduled a date at unannounced venue where there is a possibility of striking a “post election deal” More to follow…… www.kenyan-post.com/2013/03/secret-phone-call-kalonzo-calls-uhuru.html |
|
Kamalet, they aint gonna get away this time!