Ahmed Issack Hassan Response to the Petition

[Horth]

REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
PETITION NO.5 OF 2013

RAILA ODINGA…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….PETITIONER
AND
THE INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL AND
BOUNDARIES COMMISSION .........................................................................................1ST RESPONDENT
AHMED ISSACK HASSAN…………………………………………………………………………….…………..2ND RESPONDENT
HON.UHURU KENYATTA……………………………………………………………………………………….3RD RESPONDENT
WILLIAM SAMOEI RUTO ……………………………………………………………………………..……………..4TH RESPONDENT

2ND RESPONDENT'S REPLY TO THE PETITION

THE GROUNDS

1. Elections in Kenya are governed by a set legal regime. The 2013 election was conducted as provided by the Constitution of Kenya and the relevant statutes that govern elections. No breach of the constitution or any statute occurred during the process. The Petitioner is put to strict proof.

2. The election conducted on 4th March 2013 did not deviate from the normative process and procedures and was neither a sham nor a travesty. The high voter turnout and the peaceful nature of the elections is a testimony to the integrity of the election.

3. The petition fails to satisfy the evidential threshold to validate the factual assertions made by the Petitioner. The test is one of beyond reasonable doubt. The petition must in the premise fail.

4. The constitutional threshold for invalidating a presidential election under Article 140 of the Constitution has not been satisfied. No attempt has been made by the Petitioner to ventilate a set of bona fide factual matrix that bring the result of 4th March 2013 elections within the purview of Article 140 of the Constitution. A bare complaint on the part of the Petitioner cannot be the basis of nullifying the presidential election.

5. The three interrelated tests that the court must consider in the hearing and determination of the petition are the public interest test, the proportionality and harm test. These three tests singularly and collectively militate against the nullification of the result of the presidential election as sought by the Petitioner. The court in applying the public interest test must consider the proportionality and the potential harm that is likely to arise if the result is annulled.

6. The voter registration exercise which was the bedrock of the March 4th 2013 elections was done pursuant to the law. The Petitioner participated in that process and at no material time in the process did he raise a genuine and fundamental complaint against that process.

7. Article 38 of the Constitution which is a cornerstone of the petition has no relevance whatsoever to the petition. None of the rights of the individual as provided for in the said Article 38 has been violated.

8. Similarly no violation of Articles 35 and 47 of the Constitution occurred in relation to the Petitioner.

9. The petition, even though at face value is one premised on Article 140 of 3the Constitution and superficially challenges the election of the Respondent as President of the Republic of Kenya, is in reality an omnibus petition substantially grounded on the Bill of Rights under the Constitution. The fusion of the two distinct constitutional issues takes away the jurisdiction of the court to determine the many issues raised in the petition with the exception of the sole issue of the validity of the election.

10. .The Petitioner is advancing a narrow private right cleverly disguised as public rights. This must be counterbalanced against the genuine public interest in Kenyans being allowed to elect a president of their choice. The overriding public interest balancing test must prevail in the determination of the competing rights in the petition.

11. The contention by the Petitioner that the Respondent, Hon Uhuru Kenyatta did not attain the constitutional threshold of more than half of all the votes cast in the election as provided in Article 138 of the Constitution has no evidential basis whatsoever. The lack of credible, concrete and tangible evidence on the part of the Petitioner underscores the terminal structural weaknesses of the petition. It is not for the court to speculate, sympathise, empathise, assist or help the Petitioner in collating, looking for or conjuring the evidence that will help or assist the Petitioner to ventilate and prove the issue at hand and persuade the court to determine the issue in his favour.

12. The defining feature of the petition is assertions unsupported by concrete facts and law. In material part the Petitioner simply makes assertions and bases the same on a negative reading of the law. Such mere assertions cannot be the basis for invalidating a presidential election and overturning the will of the people.

13. The procurement issues raised by the Petitioner are not issues for determination by the Supreme Court. The same in any event has no effect whatsoever on both the integrity of the election process, and the results declared. The Government of Kenya through the office of the Petitioner and the Treasury in any event did the procurement of the equipment now sought to be impugned. The Petitioner cannot seek to benefit from what would, if his argument is to be accepted, be his own wrongdoing.

14. The petition personalises serious constitutional issues and is obviously devoid of merit. No breach of Articles 2, 10,38,73,81,86,88 and 136 has occurred and no evidential basis for such breach has been laid before the court.

15. In 1997, 2007 and now in 2013, the Petitioner has never conceded or accepted the will of the people as expressed in the outcome of those elections. The principle of similar facts evidence is at play.

16. The Petitioner through this petition seeks to roll back in toto all the events that occurred in the country in the past (8) months and that culminated in the election of 4th March 2013. In essence, the Petitioner is seeking the validation of the court to overturn the will of the people and be allowed a second bite at the cherry and to contest the presidency afresh while the people have spoken loudly against that result. This attempt to scuttle the important provisions of the Constitution through the petition before the court cannot and should not be validated or countenanced to by the Supreme Court.

17. The petition presented to the court by the Petitioner, is without substance in law and in fact. It is premised on a self-generated and self-serving set of facts that are based on a wrong reading of the law. A petition grounded on a mistaken reading of the law and fallacious set of facts cannot be the basis of the prayers that seek to overturn the will of the people in determining their president as provided for in the supreme law of the land.


DATED at NAIROBI this 19th day of March 2013
---------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNED BY AHMED ISSACK HASSAN THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DRAWN & FILED BY:¬
ISEME, KAMAU & MAEMA
ADVOCATES
IKM PLACE, 5TH FLOOR
5TH NGONG AVENUE, OFF BISHOPS ROAD
P.O. BOX 11866-00400
NAIROBI [Our Ref IND-006-0011-09]


TO BE SERVED UPON:¬
ORARO AND COMPANY ADVOCATES
ACK GARDEN HOUSE-WING C
1ST NGONG A VENUE
P. O. BOX 51236-00200
NAIROBI

www.iebc.or.ke/index.php/media-center/press-releases/item/petition-no-5-of-2013-2nd-respondent-s-reply-to-petition?category_id=7

Changed thread title to correctly read "Ahmed Issack Hassan Response to the Petition"

[mank]

Mar 19, 2013 21:29:01 GMT 3 Horth said:

www.iebc.or.ke/index.php/media-center/press-releases/item/petition-no-5-of-2013-2nd-respondent-s-reply-to-petition?category_id=7

That IEBC can write! Humorous too!

[kamalet]

Sufficient to tell you "underwhelming" the petition was deemed to be with such a short affidavit from the chairman!

[deyiengs]

Opira ndizo hizo... wacha wanaume wakutane kotini...

In 1997 , 2007 and now in 2013, the Petitioner has never conceded or accepted the will of the people as expressed in the outcome of those elections. The principle of similar facts evidence is at play.

[nowayhaha]

Mar 19, 2013 22:20:24 GMT 3 deyiengs said:

Opira ndizo hizo... wacha wanaume wakutane kotini...

In 1997 , 2007 and now in 2013, the Petitioner has never conceded or accepted the will of the people as expressed in the outcome of those elections. The principle of similar facts evidence is at play.

One of the reasons Kalonzo has never at one time wanted his name to be associated with the petition , He believes this petition can come back to haunt him in future apart from other reasons which are political like its a matter of time till he begins working together with UhuRuto since there is pressure from his backyard due to feelings they were duped by Muthama to shift to CORD .

Read more hapa- standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000079586&story_title=Kenya-Muthama-accused-of-%E2%80%98selling%E2%80%99-the-Kamba

This point here debunks the myth that Jubilee were working in cohorts with IEBC to rig the elections -Raila and CORD/ODM should prepare to explain to the Court and Kenyans how they settled for the BVR/EVD kits - were they the ones planning to rig the elections ? You get the drift ? and was this plan averted when IEBC reverted to manual system ? These will be a difficult one for Raila and CORD/ODM.

13. The procurement issues raised by the Petitioner are not issues for determination by the Supreme Court. The same in any event has no effect whatsoever on both the integrity of the election process, and the results declared. The Government of Kenya through the office of the Petitioner and the Treasury in any event did the procurement of the equipment now sought to be impugned. The Petitioner cannot seek to benefit from what would, if his argument is to be accepted, be his own wrongdoing.

[mwalimumkuu]

Absolutely bwana Hassan, Raila wants to use Mutunga to right his own failings as a person, as a leader and as a candidate. He has no case but regrets framed as a petition. The SC should not allow him, it should dismiss him pronto just as Kenyans in their millions have.

[Omwenga]

I have read every comment made on this thread and all I can say is,

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I just can't stop laughing but as they say, laughter is the best medicine especially at tense or uncertain times like these.

Are you guys really hearing yourselves what you're saying?

You have me thinking about two total strangers stuck in a broken elevator; sooner or later they must struggle to find something to say to keep their nerves down as they imagine plummeting 50 storeys down should the emergency brakes give up while hoping someone would show up and safely let them out.

Well, keep talking and consoling each other for the inevitable but be thankful you'll at least get out of that elevator with only your egos bruised but another set of not strangers but partners in crime stuck in another elevator may not come out as lucky for they would have the police waiting to haul them to jail the thieves they are--and caught red-handed with their instruments of trade, complete with the loot they "procured" in the building.

[mwalimumkuu]

Mar 20, 2013 0:44:59 GMT 3 Omwenga said:

I have read every comment made on this thread and all I can say is,

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I just can't stop laughing but as they say, laughter is the best medicine especially at tense or uncertain times like these.

Are you guys really hearing yourselves what you're saying?

You have me thinking about two total strangers stuck in a broken elevator; sooner or later they must struggle to find something to say to keep their nerves down as they imagine plummeting 50 storeys down should the emergency brakes give up while hoping someone would show up and safely let them out.

Well, keep talking and consoling each other for the inevitable but be thankful you'll at least get out of that elevator with only your egos bruised but another set of not strangers but partners in crime stuck in another elevator may not come out as lucky for they would have the police waiting to haul them to jail the thieves they are--and caught red-handed with their instruments of trade, complete with the loot they "procured" in the building.

Omwenga,

I agree, laughter heals but it also hides embarrassment. This is an issue Kenyans are now very well appraised and seized of. They can smell the lie from as far as across the ocean. You guys duped your King and send him out there naked, he is now dancing in the rain. Who can help him?

[omundustrong]

The SC is fully seized of this matter and will in its on wisdom do justice to it.As for hero worshippers,sycophants,the outcome will hit them like a ton of bricks!Kenyans and i mean true Kenyans expressed their will loudly and unequivocably,their will, will be done!All i can ask the protagonists is to hold their horses!Sooner than later the wheat will be separated from the chaff!

[roughrider]

Every time he has been asked to explain the shenanigans at IEBC by the media, Isaack Hassan has been quick to say that he will respond to the issues in an affidavit to the Supreme Court. I see no specific responses anywhere to the issues raised. Instead, what we have is an angry, partisan, personal, political attack on Raila Odinga.

Isaack in his affidavit does not care to apologise to Kenyans for failures, delays, multiple errors and the week wasted as IEBC took its time to rig the elections and produce a contested result.

Perhaps we should wait to read IEBC’s response because Isaack’s diatribe is a political attack statement rather than an incisive legal response to the issues CORD is raising in this election.

For instance, whereas Isaack seems to think that procurement and IT issues should not be discussed as part of ascertaining whether we had a valid electoral process; the high court in recent response to a suit filed by NGO's described the issues as 'not idle' and referred them to the Supreme Court.

Further, Isaack's stunning admission that he has all along believed that Kibaki won the elections in 2007 and that Raila would never concede is also an admission of bias and impartiality. It suffices to state that the unfortunate events of 2007/2008 led to a complete overhaul of the judicial system and a remake of the electoral body. In addition, a state commission presided by a senior judge reported that malpractices during the 2007 elections made it impossible to tell who won. So these are the elections that a senior lawyer and chair of the IEBC wanted Raila to concede to? We all know that until recently, the government in power picked the referee (ECK) guaranteeing a contest that was pre-rigged. That was the case in 2002, 1997 and 1992. Further, in those elections there were no requirements for gaining simple majorities, or run-offs, otherwise Moi would never have won and run this country with only 30% of the vote.

Strangely, I am happy that Isaack brought this up, because CORD's lawyers can now contextualise the trial in the proper history of undemocratic elections in Kenya. It goes to show the myopia that is driven by the emotional outburst disguised as a serious response.

Finally, I always find it laughable when people purport to know and understand what the public interest is. To say that a repeat elections would be against public interest is to bury ones head in the sand. Even by accounts of the discredited Isaack Hassan results, only about half of the country drawn largely from 2 kenyan tribes voted for Uhuru Kenyatta. If we go by the former provinces, this is only two regions. The greater public interest is to have a certain winner in a fair contest. The greater public interest is to set standards for democratic, free and fair polls for posterity. The greater public interest is that the will of the people expressed through popular sovereignty is expressed. I quite agree that 'democracy is on trial in Kenya' and the supreme court must rule in its favour.

The long term costs of not adjudicating fairly these elections outweigh any short term questions regarding costs of a repeat or overturn of the Isaack declarations.

[podp]

Mar 20, 2013 10:41:14 GMT 3 @roughrider said:

Every time he has been asked to explain the shenanigans at IEBC by the media, Isaack Hassan has been quick to say that he will respond to the issues in an affidavit to the Supreme Court. I see no specific responses anywhere to the issues raised. Instead, what we have is an angry, partisan, personal, political attack on Raila Odinga.

Isaack in his affidavit does not care to apologise to Kenyans for failures, delays, multiple errors and the week wasted as IEBC took its time to rig the elections and produce a contested result.

Perhaps we should wait to read IEBC’s response because Isaack’s diatribe is a political attack statement rather than an incisive legal response to the issues CORD is raising in this election.

For instance, whereas Isaack seems to think that procurement and IT issues should not be discussed as part of ascertaining whether we had a valid electoral process; the high court in recent response to a suit filed by NGO's described the issues as 'not idle' and referred them to the Supreme Court.

.

Technology firm denies it supplied faulty voter identification kits

www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000079695&story_title=Kenya-Technology-firm-denies-it-supplied-faulty-voter-identification-kits

[Wildot]

CORD Press briefing the media couldn't air.. ...Ahmed Isaack Hassan can still do much better in his defence..

[Dumekenya]

A time, a season and a will can never be stopped. The Change Idea has come and the truth about it must come out. It might be very bitter but we must accept it. Gone are the errors of impunity and blatant lies/red herring .

[Omwenga]

Mar 20, 2013 1:03:03 GMT 3 mwalimumkuu said:

Mar 20, 2013 0:44:59 GMT 3 Omwenga said:

I have read every comment made on this thread and all I can say is,

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I just can't stop laughing but as they say, laughter is the best medicine especially at tense or uncertain times like these.

Are you guys really hearing yourselves what you're saying?

You have me thinking about two total strangers stuck in a broken elevator; sooner or later they must struggle to find something to say to keep their nerves down as they imagine plummeting 50 storeys down should the emergency brakes give up while hoping someone would show up and safely let them out.

Well, keep talking and consoling each other for the inevitable but be thankful you'll at least get out of that elevator with only your egos bruised but another set of not strangers but partners in crime stuck in another elevator may not come out as lucky for they would have the police waiting to haul them to jail the thieves they are--and caught red-handed with their instruments of trade, complete with the loot they "procured" in the building.

Omwenga,

I agree, laughter heals but it also hides embarrassment. This is an issue Kenyans are now very well appraised and seized of. They can smell the lie from as far as across the ocean. You guys duped your King and send him out there naked, he is now dancing in the rain. Who can help him?

Mwalimumkuu,

In this political circle, the only person who duped anyone is Uhuru who has duped both Mudavadi and Ruto as well as their followers.

Raila is in good shape both physically and spiritually he needs no help but for the Supreme Court to render the only verdict consistent with justice as informed by the evidence and facts presented before it by Raila and Cord.

[Omwenga]

Mar 20, 2013 10:41:14 GMT 3 @roughrider said:

Every time he has been asked to explain the shenanigans at IEBC by the media, Isaack Hassan has been quick to say that he will respond to the issues in an affidavit to the Supreme Court. I see no specific responses anywhere to the issues raised. Instead, what we have is an angry, partisan, personal, political attack on Raila Odinga.

Isaack in his affidavit does not care to apologise to Kenyans for failures, delays, multiple errors and the week wasted as IEBC took its time to rig the elections and produce a contested result.

Perhaps we should wait to read IEBC’s response because Isaack’s diatribe is a political attack statement rather than an incisive legal response to the issues CORD is raising in this election.

For instance, whereas Isaack seems to think that procurement and IT issues should not be discussed as part of ascertaining whether we had a valid electoral process; the high court in recent response to a suit filed by NGO's described the issues as 'not idle' and referred them to the Supreme Court.

Further, Isaack's stunning admission that he has all along believed that Kibaki won the elections in 2007 and that Raila would never concede is also an admission of bias and impartiality. It suffices to state that the unfortunate events of 2007/2008 led to a complete overhaul of the judicial system and a remake of the electoral body. In addition, a state commission presided by a senior judge reported that malpractices during the 2007 elections made it impossible to tell who won. So these are the elections that a senior lawyer and chair of the IEBC wanted Raila to concede to? We all know that until recently, the government in power picked the referee (ECK) guaranteeing a contest that was pre-rigged. That was the case in 2002, 1997 and 1992. Further, in those elections there were no requirements for gaining simple majorities, or run-offs, otherwise Moi would never have won and run this country with only 30% of the vote.

Strangely, I am happy that Isaack brought this up, because CORD's lawyers can now contextualise the trial in the proper history of undemocratic elections in Kenya. It goes to show the myopia that is driven by the emotional outburst disguised as a serious response.

Finally, I always find it laughable when people purport to know and understand what the public interest is. To say that a repeat elections would be against public interest is to bury ones head in the sand. Even by accounts of the discredited Isaack Hassan results, only about half of the country drawn largely from 2 kenyan tribes voted for Uhuru Kenyatta. If we go by the former provinces, this is only two regions. The greater public interest is to have a certain winner in a fair contest. The greater public interest is to set standards for democratic, free and fair polls for posterity. The greater public interest is that the will of the people expressed through popular sovereignty is expressed. I quite agree that 'democracy is on trial in Kenya' and the supreme court must rule in its favour.

The long term costs of not adjudicating fairly these elections outweigh any short term questions regarding costs of a repeat or overturn of the Isaack declarations.

RR,

I totally associate with your sentiments.

[Omwenga]

Mar 20, 2013 7:34:36 GMT 3 omundustrong said:

The SC is fully seized of this matter and will in its on wisdom do justice to it.As for hero worshippers,sycophants,the outcome will hit them like a ton of bricks!Kenyans and i mean true Kenyans expressed their will loudly and unequivocably,their will, will be done!All i can ask the protagonists is to hold their horses!Sooner than later the wheat will be separated from the chaff!

Fyi disparaging those on the opposing side of your political viewpoint by calling them names only goes to show you're the weaker of the two in substance therefore you must augment your weak position with name calling in the naive believe it makes a difference; it doesn't other than in confirming your weak position.

[abdulmote]

What an empty bull from Mr Hassan. Having read through his response, I could hardly find anything worth such effort. I doubt if it could pass with reasonable marks for a year one, first semester's assignment.

An aside: I have noticed at least one of our settled members who decided to register a second new handle during the '48 hour window'! Waste of time and unnecessary headache, he will soon find out. The 'he' is deliberate.

[Deleted]

githu muigai the country's Attorney General, is partners in a law firm which is representing the IEBC @ the Supreme Court. that's outrageous.

now, what do you think uhuruto proponents would say if mutunga had done that? they should speak about mutunga having opinions. do people like githu muigai have opinions? if so, what are they?



www.standardmedia.co.ke/ktn/video/watch/2000064433/-the-iebc-legal-team

[gakungu]

Abdulmote,

I am also shocked by the kneejerk response by Isaack Hassan.

Instead of addressing weighty issues raised in the petition he has decided to attack the personality of the Prime Minster and making allegations like the 1997 and 2007 elections passed the test as credible polls by any standards that there were not supposed to be contested. This is the more reason the Mar 4th 2013 elections should be interrogated in depth if the person who was incharge was using the 1997 and 2007 as his benchmark.

It is actually the current president Mwai Kibaki who filed a petition in Court challenging the Outcome of 1997 general election and not Raila Odinga. Infact, if one can revisit the post 2007 electin press conference attended by Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga, you will attest to the fact that Mwai Kibaki was an angry man who threated to make Kenya ungovernable through civil disobedience. Why is it only a problem when it is Raila Odinga raising these issues?

I don't care if he is driven by personal interest as long as this converge with the public interest and the greater good. He has proved that in the past through his legendary push for multi partisym, a new constitutional order, championing for an independent judiciary, and recently a reformed police service and needles to mention the crearing of bypasses which laid foundation for the road networks we are 'proudly' crediting Mwai Kibaki for and the list is endless.


Kenyans should also be reminded that the lead counsel for the IEBC in this petition led an onslaught against Justice Omolo during the vetting process of the judges for the ruling he delivered against Ken Matiba petion challenging the 1992 elections. If the election for 1992,1997, 2007 were free and fair, Justice Omolo ought to have retained his position for upholding the 'popular will' of the people.

But it is common knowledge that the three elections were a total SHAM.

Call us sycophants, heroworshippers or whatever you would like but lest assured we are not retreating an inch in our quest for a just and more equal society where all Kenyans enjoys equal opportunities.

Let us stay focussed on real issues.

[progressiveideals]

gakungu, @rr

I concur with your assessment. I too am appalled at how juvenile, and sub-standard Hassan's response to the petition is. That he has not even addressed the Kencall issue, which in my mind is one of the major points in this petition is puzzling.

I would have liked to see him come out and explicitly deny that Kencall co-hosted IEBC and TNA data on the same server. The denial wasn't forthcoming and it makes me worry that the allegations are true. I hope he and his lawyers are able to demonstrate a greater level of competence through the hearing of the petition.

[Horth]

15. In 1997, 2007 and now in 2013, the Petitioner has never conceded or accepted the will of the people as expressed in the outcome of those elections. The principle of similar facts evidence is at play.

Very very silly and completely uncalled for.

[patriotism101]

Mar 20, 2013 22:02:13 GMT 3 Horth said:

15. In 1997, 2007 and now in 2013, the Petitioner has never conceded or accepted the will of the people as expressed in the outcome of those elections. The principle of similar facts evidence is at play.

Very very silly and completely uncalled for.

Scratching my head at this one- what a joke?-is this a ploy by the IEBC to let the petition go through?

This Hassan man is etremely weak and incompetent.

[OJ]

RR,

Your observation is spot on. It is very unfortunate that Hassan had to write such a response to a serious petition that has far reaching implications. He reduced it to a personal attack on the petitioner. He uses what I would call the 'forbidden chain of reasoning'. It does not always follow that because someone has behaved a certain way in the past, he shall always behave like that. All the circumstances need to be considered in the context of when they happened. In 2007, if Kreigler said he wasn't sure who won the elections, why would someone concede when there are so many anomalies?
Let us await the evidence and then arrive at an informed conclusion. We shall see who truly has made their case.

[tatyen]

rough rider, i agree with your sentiments in total. I belive Issack Hassan, without any prompting owes an explanation to the kenyan public over the conduct of the just concluded elections. over 8 billion kenya shillings of taxpayers money was spent on equipment which malfunctioned at the most inopportune moment. This despite the fact that several commentators in the kenyan media has questioned the efficacy of the Biometric voter identification system and the electronic transmission system. You will recall that sarah Elderkin of the star newspaper raised these questions after the IEBC invited journalists to a demonstration of the system where out of 5 mock polling stations, just one was able to connect to the system, and even then only after 3 hours of trying. There were also grave concerns raise by the Bob Collymore of Safaricom and the IEBC's own IT department. In my view the chairmans insistence on going into an election, in which the stakes were so high with equipment which he knew fully well to be faulty points to gross negligence and incompetence at best or possibly a deliberate attempt manipulation of the entire electoral process.

Secondly, Raila Odinga raises very damming allegations in his petition which the chairman has not bothered to address. If it is proven that the IEBC actually shared a server with the Jubilee coalition, then he must let kenyans know if he had prior knowledge of this fact and why this was allowed to happen knowing fully well that it would cast doubt on the integrity of the poll.

Lastly you will recall that one of the contentious issues in the violent 2007 elections was the fact that in many polling stations, the number of votes cast for the presidential elections vastly outnumber the number of votes cast for the member of parliament. If it is indeed true as Journalist David Makali pointed out on his Citizen Television Cheche Live interview with TNA chairman Johnston Sakaja, that over 1.5 million votes were cast for the in the presidential election over and above those cast for the other 5 elective positions, then this is another issue that demands an explanation for the chairman. To the best of my knowledge, every voter entering a polling station was issued with 6 serialized ballot papers. These ballots must be accounted for, either as spoilt votes, rejected votes or valid votes. The suggestion that up to 10% of the voting public could have walked into a polling station and voted for the president to the exclusion of the other 5 elective positions is in itself stretching the imagination a little too far.

In conclusion i will say this. Whichever side of the political divide you support, one thing is evident. Kenya is today more ethnically divided than it has been at any other point in its history. The fact that Raila won 6 provinces to Uhuru's 2 is an indictment of the electoral climate prevailing in the country at this moment. It also sets the dangerous precedent that 2 or 3 large ethnic groups can conspire amongst themselves to monopolize power for eons on end. If this trend continues, you can safely conclude that a pokomo, a Turkana or an Ogiek will never ascend to power in the republic of kenya no matter how uniquely qualified they may be, simply because they come from a minority tribe. By reducing the electoral process to an ethnic census, we are in effect condoning the marginalization of huge swathes of the country in the name of democracy - a fact which in itself will create numerous problems for the kenyan republic in the not too distant future. Compare and contrast this to the United States of America where, Barack Obama, a black man was able to win two terms to the white house despite the fact that African Americans only account for less than 13 percent of the total population.

I personally lay the blame for this whole heartedly at the feet of our outgoing president Mwai Kibaki. Ten years ago he inherited a united, optimistic country and arguably the best chance to lay to rest the ghosts of tribalism and build a united country in which every kenyan feels a sense of belonging and inclusiveness. Today he is handing back to us a country whose national fabric has been ripped apart by negative ethnicity. This will go down in history as his single most spectacular failing. We elected Kibaki to the presidency with high hopes, but instead of naturing a democratic culture, with strong political parties based on ideology, he has systematically dismantled our political institutions, actively encouraged negative ethnicity and overseen the complete collapse of party discipline, which has ultimately led us to the position in which we now find ourselves.

[podp]

Mar 22, 2013 0:47:53 GMT 3 tatyen said:

rough rider, i agree with your sentiments in total. I belive Issack Hassan, without any prompting owes an explanation to the kenyan public over the conduct of the just concluded elections. over 8 billion kenya shillings of taxpayers money was spent on equipment which malfunctioned at the most inopportune moment. This despite the fact that several commentators in the kenyan media has questioned the efficacy of the Biometric voter identification system and the electronic transmission system. You will recall that sarah Elderkin of the star newspaper raised these questions after the IEBC invited journalists to a demonstration of the system where out of 5 mock polling stations, just one was able to connect to the system, and even then only after 3 hours of trying. There were also grave concerns raise by the Bob Collymore of Safaricom and the IEBC's own IT department. In my view the chairmans insistence on going into an election, in which the stakes were so high with equipment which he knew fully well to be faulty points to gross negligence and incompetence at best or possibly a deliberate attempt manipulation of the entire electoral process.

Secondly, Raila Odinga raises very damming allegations in his petition which the chairman has not bothered to address. If it is proven that the IEBC actually shared a server with the Jubilee coalition, then he must let kenyans know if he had prior knowledge of this fact and why this was allowed to happen knowing fully well that it would cast doubt on the integrity of the poll.

Lastly you will recall that one of the contentious issues in the violent 2007 elections was the fact that in many polling stations, the number of votes cast for the presidential elections vastly outnumber the number of votes cast for the member of parliament. If it is indeed true as Journalist David Makali pointed out on his Citizen Television Cheche Live interview with TNA chairman Johnston Sakaja, that over 1.5 million votes were cast for the in the presidential election over and above those cast for the other 5 elective positions, then this is another issue that demands an explanation for the chairman. To the best of my knowledge, every voter entering a polling station was issued with 6 serialized ballot papers. These ballots must be accounted for, either as spoilt votes, rejected votes or valid votes. The suggestion that up to 10% of the voting public could have walked into a polling station and voted for the president to the exclusion of the other 5 elective positions is in itself stretching the imagination a little too far.

In conclusion i will say this. Whichever side of the political divide you support, one thing is evident. Kenya is today more ethnically divided than it has been at any other point in its history. The fact that Raila won 6 provinces to Uhuru's 2 is an indictment of the electoral climate prevailing in the country at this moment. It also sets the dangerous precedent that 2 or 3 large ethnic groups can conspire amongst themselves to monopolize power for eons on end. If this trend continues, you can safely conclude that a pokomo, a Turkana or an Ogiek will never ascend to power in the republic of kenya no matter how uniquely qualified they may be, simply because they come from a minority tribe. By reducing the electoral process to an ethnic census, we are in effect condoning the marginalization of huge swathes of the country in the name of democracy - a fact which in itself will create numerous problems for the kenyan republic in the not too distant future. Compare and contrast this to the United States of America where, Barack Obama, a black man was able to win two terms to the white house despite the fact that African Americans only account for less than 13 percent of the total population.

I personally lay the blame for this whole heartedly at the feet of our outgoing president Mwai Kibaki. Ten years ago he inherited a united, optimistic country and arguably the best chance to lay to rest the ghosts of tribalism and build a united country in which every kenyan feels a sense of belonging and inclusiveness. Today he is handing back to us a country whose national fabric has been ripped apart by negative ethnicity. This will go down in history as his single most spectacular failing. We elected Kibaki to the presidency with high hopes, but instead of naturing a democratic culture, with strong political parties based on ideology, he has systematically dismantled our political institutions, actively encouraged negative ethnicity and overseen the complete collapse of party discipline, which has ultimately led us to the position in which we now find ourselves.

very nice start (1st red high light) degenerating to a blame game(last red high light) heaped at the current PORK as if he single handedly did us in!

let me quote Standard’s opinion that agrees with you (1st red high light) to lay the matter at rest, hopefully to your favor. But which between Secondly and Thirdly do you think carries more weight if it were possible to separate them?

‘Secondly, we know how strong the bonds of tribal alliance are in this country. We are in one big jungle where the ‘big two among the five’ could unite and decide to rule us on rotation; they will do so forever no matter the glittering manifestos and awesome promises of delivery the other candidates stand for.
Thirdly, because the umbilical cord of Uhuru-Ruto alliance is the common denominator called The Hague courtroom, we have seen what actually drives our ethnic politics; fear, the fear of the unknown against which the only known refuge is power.’

www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000079882&pageNo=2&story_title=Kenya-My-congrats-to-Uhuru-and-Ruto-will-have-to-wait

in my view ICC carries more weight and the politics of personality cult best practiced by RAO and now turned on him by a combination of UhuRuto who mirrored RAO but more devastatingly than RAO attempted to malign the two indictees

when the dust settles we will have to learn to not use political parties as special purpose vehicles to State house bu as one fb distraught fellow wrote

'Kenya needs action which will consolidate and expand reforms which are embodied in our 2010 constitution. This constitution is the product of decades of intense struggle and sacrifice. Our action must be well thought out. This can only be possible through the organisation of a popular movement, the organisation of a disciplined political party around a political programme able to unite and coordinate various forms of struggle and direct them towards a common goal.

The only way in which anyone can plan activity and produce a programme is through focused thinking — the development of change theory which, if it is properly worked out, does not hold back our practical activity but rather serves as a compass which enables us to move in the direction we want to go.'