Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
NASA moves to the Supreme Court
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/22/2008 Posts: 2,723
|
Ekuru Aukot, I know you have a right to contest but please withdraw. It takes too long to read your 20 or 30 votes from 47 counties. I am just asking you to save us time. You got 27,000 votes. Please look for a suitable MCA position in Baringo and vie there in 2022.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 9/21/2011 Posts: 2,032
|
Kusadikika wrote:Ekuru Aukot, I know you have a right to contest but please withdraw. It takes too long to read your 20 or 30 votes from 47 counties. I am just asking you to save us time. You got 27,000 votes. Please look for a suitable MCA position in Baringo and vie there in 2022. First he said he has conceded. Then, at SC he is on record saying he was not disputing uhuru's win..Then he wants to partcipate? We can only conclude one thing- aliar is pushing him to contest so that there is still possibility of run-off and thus prolonged stalemate which can lead to caretaker govt formed by political parties. And the case will be taken b4 naswa friendly judge who will order iebc to include his name...
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 5/9/2007 Posts: 13,095
|
murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:B.Timer wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:IEBC pia wanapenda mchezo and uchokozi sana, why not make the election open at least to the 8 previous contestants. Methinks it’s a ploy to expose the court for not having made itself clear. Dragging each other’s name through mud. The matter on who runs in a fresh poll was addressed by the Supreme court in 2013. Link post(s) above. Aukot and others can challenge that but it remains as law I also think that politically this was a very bad move. The final ruling has not been written. What makes you think that this whole issue has not been added to the rulings today. Testing a court is usually not advised. Ask the fella who came up with the silly reason that the court couldn't access servers. Patience is lacking in this IEBC. They don't even know if the guy who tweeted will be working there when the final ruling is given. Haki sometimes I think we politic too much in this country. Tooo mash. You lost. Accept and move on. Give us a credible election then go home. Let the rest of us be. Aii! IEBC is following the guidelines provided by the court in 2013. The law was not contested and therefore it did not change. If Aukot thinks otherwise, he can challenge the 2013 submission and a new guide/law will be provided. Wachana na emotions na usome hio document, the various outcomes were addressed including in the event one of the contestants died. What Maraga is about to release is the ruling in detail, no suggestions on who will be on the ballot. The law does not rule on matters not brought before them @alma...you ought to know that. The issue on who will be on the ballot was never before them IEBC is using the 2013 ruling because as it is now, its the Supreme law around that area. It is the only known interpretation. However, I find that ruling a bit confusing. Any Kenyan Citizen can petition the Supreme Court to invalidate an election. For instance the NGOs had planned to go to court. What if they did and the court ruled to their favor? By declaring that only the petitioner and the President elect would go for the fresh election, What if the petitioner is @Alma in his capacity as a Kenyan Citizen, even though the other contestants have already conceded? 
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/22/2009 Posts: 2,449 Location: Africa
|
washiku wrote:murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:B.Timer wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:IEBC pia wanapenda mchezo and uchokozi sana, why not make the election open at least to the 8 previous contestants. Methinks it’s a ploy to expose the court for not having made itself clear. Dragging each other’s name through mud. The matter on who runs in a fresh poll was addressed by the Supreme court in 2013. Link post(s) above. Aukot and others can challenge that but it remains as law I also think that politically this was a very bad move. The final ruling has not been written. What makes you think that this whole issue has not been added to the rulings today. Testing a court is usually not advised. Ask the fella who came up with the silly reason that the court couldn't access servers. Patience is lacking in this IEBC. They don't even know if the guy who tweeted will be working there when the final ruling is given. Haki sometimes I think we politic too much in this country. Tooo mash. You lost. Accept and move on. Give us a credible election then go home. Let the rest of us be. Aii! IEBC is following the guidelines provided by the court in 2013. The law was not contested and therefore it did not change. If Aukot thinks otherwise, he can challenge the 2013 submission and a new guide/law will be provided. Wachana na emotions na usome hio document, the various outcomes were addressed including in the event one of the contestants died. What Maraga is about to release is the ruling in detail, no suggestions on who will be on the ballot. The law does not rule on matters not brought before them @alma...you ought to know that. The issue on who will be on the ballot was never before them IEBC is using the 2013 ruling because as it is now, its the Supreme law around that area. It is the only known interpretation. However, I find that ruling a bit confusing. Any Kenyan Citizen can petition the Supreme Court to invalidate an election. For instance the NGOs had planned to go to court. What if they did and the court ruled to their favor? By declaring that only the petitioner and the President elect would go for the fresh election, What if the petitioner is @Alma in his capacity as a Kenyan Citizen, even though the other contestants have already conceded? In that case, all the candidates will be entitled to participate in the fresh election. Read the last paragraph
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
Shak wrote:washiku wrote:murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:B.Timer wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:IEBC pia wanapenda mchezo and uchokozi sana, why not make the election open at least to the 8 previous contestants. Methinks it’s a ploy to expose the court for not having made itself clear. Dragging each other’s name through mud. The matter on who runs in a fresh poll was addressed by the Supreme court in 2013. Link post(s) above. Aukot and others can challenge that but it remains as law I also think that politically this was a very bad move. The final ruling has not been written. What makes you think that this whole issue has not been added to the rulings today. Testing a court is usually not advised. Ask the fella who came up with the silly reason that the court couldn't access servers. Patience is lacking in this IEBC. They don't even know if the guy who tweeted will be working there when the final ruling is given. Haki sometimes I think we politic too much in this country. Tooo mash. You lost. Accept and move on. Give us a credible election then go home. Let the rest of us be. Aii! IEBC is following the guidelines provided by the court in 2013. The law was not contested and therefore it did not change. If Aukot thinks otherwise, he can challenge the 2013 submission and a new guide/law will be provided. Wachana na emotions na usome hio document, the various outcomes were addressed including in the event one of the contestants died. What Maraga is about to release is the ruling in detail, no suggestions on who will be on the ballot. The law does not rule on matters not brought before them @alma...you ought to know that. The issue on who will be on the ballot was never before them IEBC is using the 2013 ruling because as it is now, its the Supreme law around that area. It is the only known interpretation. However, I find that ruling a bit confusing. Any Kenyan Citizen can petition the Supreme Court to invalidate an election. For instance the NGOs had planned to go to court. What if they did and the court ruled to their favor? By declaring that only the petitioner and the President elect would go for the fresh election, What if the petitioner is @Alma in his capacity as a Kenyan Citizen, even though the other contestants have already conceded? In that case, all the candidates will be entitled to participate in the fresh election. Read the last paragraph Write it for us may be we cant see "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 5/9/2007 Posts: 13,095
|
murchr wrote:Shak wrote:washiku wrote:murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:B.Timer wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:IEBC pia wanapenda mchezo and uchokozi sana, why not make the election open at least to the 8 previous contestants. Methinks it’s a ploy to expose the court for not having made itself clear. Dragging each other’s name through mud. The matter on who runs in a fresh poll was addressed by the Supreme court in 2013. Link post(s) above. Aukot and others can challenge that but it remains as law I also think that politically this was a very bad move. The final ruling has not been written. What makes you think that this whole issue has not been added to the rulings today. Testing a court is usually not advised. Ask the fella who came up with the silly reason that the court couldn't access servers. Patience is lacking in this IEBC. They don't even know if the guy who tweeted will be working there when the final ruling is given. Haki sometimes I think we politic too much in this country. Tooo mash. You lost. Accept and move on. Give us a credible election then go home. Let the rest of us be. Aii! IEBC is following the guidelines provided by the court in 2013. The law was not contested and therefore it did not change. If Aukot thinks otherwise, he can challenge the 2013 submission and a new guide/law will be provided. Wachana na emotions na usome hio document, the various outcomes were addressed including in the event one of the contestants died. What Maraga is about to release is the ruling in detail, no suggestions on who will be on the ballot. The law does not rule on matters not brought before them @alma...you ought to know that. The issue on who will be on the ballot was never before them IEBC is using the 2013 ruling because as it is now, its the Supreme law around that area. It is the only known interpretation. However, I find that ruling a bit confusing. Any Kenyan Citizen can petition the Supreme Court to invalidate an election. For instance the NGOs had planned to go to court. What if they did and the court ruled to their favor? By declaring that only the petitioner and the President elect would go for the fresh election, What if the petitioner is @Alma in his capacity as a Kenyan Citizen, even though the other contestants have already conceded? In that case, all the candidates will be entitled to participate in the fresh election. Read the last paragraph Write it for us may be we cant see "In a case where the election of a declared President-elect is annulled following the petition of a person who was not a candidate in the original election, then each of the Presidential-election candidates in the original election would be entitled to participate in the "fresh election"-and no fresh nominations would be required." Actually wonder how I didn't see that. Let me blame it on "Viceroy" and move on
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
washiku wrote:murchr wrote:Shak wrote:washiku wrote:murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:B.Timer wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:IEBC pia wanapenda mchezo and uchokozi sana, why not make the election open at least to the 8 previous contestants. Methinks it’s a ploy to expose the court for not having made itself clear. Dragging each other’s name through mud. The matter on who runs in a fresh poll was addressed by the Supreme court in 2013. Link post(s) above. Aukot and others can challenge that but it remains as law I also think that politically this was a very bad move. The final ruling has not been written. What makes you think that this whole issue has not been added to the rulings today. Testing a court is usually not advised. Ask the fella who came up with the silly reason that the court couldn't access servers. Patience is lacking in this IEBC. They don't even know if the guy who tweeted will be working there when the final ruling is given. Haki sometimes I think we politic too much in this country. Tooo mash. You lost. Accept and move on. Give us a credible election then go home. Let the rest of us be. Aii! IEBC is following the guidelines provided by the court in 2013. The law was not contested and therefore it did not change. If Aukot thinks otherwise, he can challenge the 2013 submission and a new guide/law will be provided. Wachana na emotions na usome hio document, the various outcomes were addressed including in the event one of the contestants died. What Maraga is about to release is the ruling in detail, no suggestions on who will be on the ballot. The law does not rule on matters not brought before them @alma...you ought to know that. The issue on who will be on the ballot was never before them IEBC is using the 2013 ruling because as it is now, its the Supreme law around that area. It is the only known interpretation. However, I find that ruling a bit confusing. Any Kenyan Citizen can petition the Supreme Court to invalidate an election. For instance the NGOs had planned to go to court. What if they did and the court ruled to their favor? By declaring that only the petitioner and the President elect would go for the fresh election, What if the petitioner is @Alma in his capacity as a Kenyan Citizen, even though the other contestants have already conceded? In that case, all the candidates will be entitled to participate in the fresh election. Read the last paragraph Write it for us may be we cant see "In a case where the election of a declared President-elect is annulled following the petition of a person who was not a candidate in the original election, then each of the Presidential-election candidates in the original election would be entitled to participate in the "fresh election"-and no fresh nominations would be required." Actually wonder how I didn't see that. Let me blame it on "Viceroy" and move on Raila brught the petition so he was a candidate. Read the paragraph that begins with "The answer to the question whether the "fresh election" contemplated under Article 140(3)...... "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 5/9/2007 Posts: 13,095
|
murchr wrote:washiku wrote:murchr wrote:Shak wrote:washiku wrote:murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:B.Timer wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:IEBC pia wanapenda mchezo and uchokozi sana, why not make the election open at least to the 8 previous contestants. Methinks it’s a ploy to expose the court for not having made itself clear. Dragging each other’s name through mud. The matter on who runs in a fresh poll was addressed by the Supreme court in 2013. Link post(s) above. Aukot and others can challenge that but it remains as law I also think that politically this was a very bad move. The final ruling has not been written. What makes you think that this whole issue has not been added to the rulings today. Testing a court is usually not advised. Ask the fella who came up with the silly reason that the court couldn't access servers. Patience is lacking in this IEBC. They don't even know if the guy who tweeted will be working there when the final ruling is given. Haki sometimes I think we politic too much in this country. Tooo mash. You lost. Accept and move on. Give us a credible election then go home. Let the rest of us be. Aii! IEBC is following the guidelines provided by the court in 2013. The law was not contested and therefore it did not change. If Aukot thinks otherwise, he can challenge the 2013 submission and a new guide/law will be provided. Wachana na emotions na usome hio document, the various outcomes were addressed including in the event one of the contestants died. What Maraga is about to release is the ruling in detail, no suggestions on who will be on the ballot. The law does not rule on matters not brought before them @alma...you ought to know that. The issue on who will be on the ballot was never before them IEBC is using the 2013 ruling because as it is now, its the Supreme law around that area. It is the only known interpretation. However, I find that ruling a bit confusing. Any Kenyan Citizen can petition the Supreme Court to invalidate an election. For instance the NGOs had planned to go to court. What if they did and the court ruled to their favor? By declaring that only the petitioner and the President elect would go for the fresh election, What if the petitioner is @Alma in his capacity as a Kenyan Citizen, even though the other contestants have already conceded? In that case, all the candidates will be entitled to participate in the fresh election. Read the last paragraph Write it for us may be we cant see "In a case where the election of a declared President-elect is annulled following the petition of a person who was not a candidate in the original election, then each of the Presidential-election candidates in the original election would be entitled to participate in the "fresh election"-and no fresh nominations would be required." Actually wonder how I didn't see that. Let me blame it on "Viceroy" and move on Raila brught the petition so he was a candidate. Read the paragraph that begins with "The answer to the question whether the "fresh election" contemplated under Article 140(3)...... That is not in dispute sir
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
washiku wrote:murchr wrote:washiku wrote:murchr wrote:Shak wrote:washiku wrote:murchr wrote:alma1 wrote:murchr wrote:B.Timer wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:IEBC pia wanapenda mchezo and uchokozi sana, why not make the election open at least to the 8 previous contestants. Methinks it’s a ploy to expose the court for not having made itself clear. Dragging each other’s name through mud. The matter on who runs in a fresh poll was addressed by the Supreme court in 2013. Link post(s) above. Aukot and others can challenge that but it remains as law I also think that politically this was a very bad move. The final ruling has not been written. What makes you think that this whole issue has not been added to the rulings today. Testing a court is usually not advised. Ask the fella who came up with the silly reason that the court couldn't access servers. Patience is lacking in this IEBC. They don't even know if the guy who tweeted will be working there when the final ruling is given. Haki sometimes I think we politic too much in this country. Tooo mash. You lost. Accept and move on. Give us a credible election then go home. Let the rest of us be. Aii! IEBC is following the guidelines provided by the court in 2013. The law was not contested and therefore it did not change. If Aukot thinks otherwise, he can challenge the 2013 submission and a new guide/law will be provided. Wachana na emotions na usome hio document, the various outcomes were addressed including in the event one of the contestants died. What Maraga is about to release is the ruling in detail, no suggestions on who will be on the ballot. The law does not rule on matters not brought before them @alma...you ought to know that. The issue on who will be on the ballot was never before them IEBC is using the 2013 ruling because as it is now, its the Supreme law around that area. It is the only known interpretation. However, I find that ruling a bit confusing. Any Kenyan Citizen can petition the Supreme Court to invalidate an election. For instance the NGOs had planned to go to court. What if they did and the court ruled to their favor? By declaring that only the petitioner and the President elect would go for the fresh election, What if the petitioner is @Alma in his capacity as a Kenyan Citizen, even though the other contestants have already conceded? In that case, all the candidates will be entitled to participate in the fresh election. Read the last paragraph Write it for us may be we cant see "In a case where the election of a declared President-elect is annulled following the petition of a person who was not a candidate in the original election, then each of the Presidential-election candidates in the original election would be entitled to participate in the "fresh election"-and no fresh nominations would be required." Actually wonder how I didn't see that. Let me blame it on "Viceroy" and move on Raila brught the petition so he was a candidate. Read the paragraph that begins with "The answer to the question whether the "fresh election" contemplated under Article 140(3)...... That is not in dispute sir I aint saying it is, was just stating for the likes of @harrydre he is asking the same question in some thread. Ni mingi ata nachanganyikiwa "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 5/9/2007 Posts: 13,095
|
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
NASA moves to the Supreme Court
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|