wazua Sat, Jun 27, 2026
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

16 Pages«<1011121314>»
Politics update Mon 25-Mar-13
kiriita
#111 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 5:19:26 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 4/20/2008
Posts: 437
Question: Petition No 3/13 was lodged on March 14, Petition No 4/13 on March 15 and Petition No 5/13 on March 16. They've now been consolidated with Petition No 5/13 as the 'mother file'. So what's the last day for delivery of the ruling considering the cap of 14 days from the filing date?
murchr
#112 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 5:23:54 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 2/26/2012
Posts: 15,980
By the way, have they discussed Itumbis petititon?
"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
.
Jus Blazin
#113 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 5:37:35 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 10/23/2008
Posts: 3,966
maka wrote:
Rahatupu wrote:
Jus Blazin wrote:
maka wrote:
McReggae wrote:
Court adjourned to 3pm.

Ahmednassir isnt a serious fellow...and Ngatia has no point. In our laws the Applicant has the last bite at the cherry. You cannot as a respondent say you want to file a further affidavit in reply to an Applicant's further affidavit. Look at this timelines: Petition filed on March 16, IEBC and UK/Ruto respond on March 20 and 21 (out of time) they do not supply all evidence.CORD team goes to Court before Lenaola J and get an order to compel. They serve the documents requested on Saturday 23rd.They now under the guiding principles of the Supreme Court Rules file the FINAL affidavit on Saturday (the 900 page one which roughly 890 of those are exhibits BY IEBC) then they now want to file another reply to their own documents? Really? Ahmednassir's brief is simple. Delay delay delay delay

Do you understand why there was a 9-day period before pre-trial conference? Court Registrar had three days to publish petition, the next three days were for the Petitioner to serve Respondents, Respondents had another three days to respond. Out of time? Hope you are answered.



Well said.

Not well said,I just dont say things for the sake.... One needs to look at the totality of the SC process vis a vis the applicable law. Article 140 does not provide for a time limit for responses to a Petition but only sets out the time limit for filing a petition and determination of the same. Under the Supreme Court Presidential Petition Rules 2013 states in Rule 8 that "Upon service of a petition under Rule 7, a respondent who wishes to oppose the petition may WITHIN three days of service of the petition file a response....'. The Petition was filed on the 16th and served electronically on the same date within 2 hours of filing pursuant to Rule 7 (2) of the aforesaid rules and physically for some of the Respondents on the same date and the rest on the Monday after. Time thus began to run in terms of Rule 8 as read with sub rule 7(2) at 3pm on Saturday 16th March. The responses are thus out of time. The Pre Trial Conference set out in Rule 9 is supplementary to and not in derogation to rules 7 and 8. Indeed if you look at that provison it does not preclude service or states that service will be subject to pre trial preliminaries under Rules 9 and 10...anything else?

Boss, IEBC's response was received by the Supreme Court on March 19th, within the three-day period as stipulated by Rule 8(1).
Luck is when Preparation meets Opportunity. ~ Lucius Annaeus Seneca
McReggae
#114 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 5:48:13 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 6/17/2008
Posts: 23,365
Location: Nairobi
From underwhelming to overwhelming????
..."Wewe ni mtu mdogo sana....na mwenye amekuandika pia ni mtu mdogo sana!".
washiku
#115 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 5:48:57 PM
Rank: Chief

Joined: 5/9/2007
Posts: 13,095
freiks wrote:
Any links to which these polling stations are?


Could be some of these:
Quote:
SUMMARY OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CORD RESPONSE TO IEBC, UHURU KENYATTA & WILLIAM RUTO DEFENCE

ON Saturday, March 23, 2013, the Petitioner (Prime Minister Raila Odinga) filed a response to the replying affidavits by the respondents to the Cord petition in the Supreme Court registry.

The full hearing of the petition commences tomorrow at the Supreme Court. Below is a summary of the reply to the affidavits of the four respondents — Chairman Isaack Hassan, IEBC, Uhuru Kenyatta, and William Ruto (full documents attached).

The Cord response can be summarized into the following:

a) Inaccurate transfer and inflating of votes from Form 34 to Form 36:

CORD provides numerous examples of how the number of votes entered in IEBC Form 34 was changed when entered into Form 36. For example, in Mogongo Primary School polling station in North Mugirango Constituency the original Form 34 figure of 3 votes for Uhuru was entered as 236, an additional difference of 233 votes; Lemelepo Water Project polling station in Kajiado North Constituency shows that while Form 34 originally indicated 2740 for Mr Kenyatta, this figure increased by 264 votes to a total of 3004 in Form 36.

CORD also cites similar examples from Garsen, Igembe Central, Chuka Igambang’ombe, Manyatta, Ol Jorok, Mukurweini, Kabete, Kapseret, Tinderet, Tiaty, Kajiado North, Chepalungu, Konoin, Luanda, Funyula among others.


b) Inflating of votes for Uhuru Kenyatta in form 36 in the Final Tally:

An affidavit sworn by ODM executive officer Janet Ongera also presents cases where the Form 36 entries were further altered to inflate Uhuru Kenyatta’s votes in the final national tally announced by IEBC at Bomas of Kenya.

Quoting examples from Kisauni, Tigania East, South Imenti, Runyenjes, Mavoko, Othaya Nyeri Town, Kiharu, Lari, Kajiado West, Lurambi, Hamisi, Mr Elgon

Webuye West, Seme, North Mugirango among others, CORD exposes a “scheme of inflation” of Uhuru’s votes in the figures announced in Bomas.

Among quoted examples is Lari Constituency where results entered at the Constituency tallying centre and the ones announced in Bomas show an increase of 1,367 for Uhuru Kenyatta. South Imenti is shown to have announced 62,481 at the Constituency’s Form 36 and 63,271 at Bomas National tally giving Uhuru Kenyatta 790 additional votes.

In Kisauni, Uhuru Kenyatta gained an additional 528 votes. While Form 36 indicates 10,366, IEBC’s final tally at Bomas indicates 10,894. In Mt Elgon, Uhuru gained an extra 500 votes (Form 36 shows 28,786 while the Final Tally shows 29,286).

c) Reduction of Raila Odinga’s Votes

Raila Odinga’s votes were also reduced in Form 36 logs (Constituency results) in spite of Form 34 (Polling Station Results) indicating he had a higher number of Votes. Examples are attached from 38 constituencies where Raila Odinga’s results at the polling stations (Form 34) were tampered with and reduced when the final constituency results were lodged into Form 36.

The 38 constituencies include Kisauni, Bura, Matayos, Tigania West, South Imenti, Manyatta, Runyenjes, Kitui, Makueni, Mathira, Juja, Nyeri Town, Turkana Central, Samburu, Aldai, Tiati, Baringo Central, Laikipia West, Laikipia East, Kajiado North, Chepalungu, Mumias East, Shinyalu, Luanda, Emuhaya, Sirisia, Webuye West, Tongaren, North Mugirango, Othaya, Roysambu among others.

d) Use of Electronic Voting

In his reply, Odinga also states that

i. the use of technology in the elections was intended to act as a check and control system and its failure affected the results fundamentally.

ii. that the explanations given by the IEBC downplaying the failure of the system and its effect on the elections “takes the common intellect of the people of Kenya for granted”

iii. that the IEBC explanations about the failure of the system are not factual

Mr Odinga also has attached a sworn affidavit from an ICT expert whose testimony shows that the Kencall Relationship with IEBC and TNA compromised data management.

a) Kencall EPZ used a single IP address 196.1.26.40 for both the IEBC and Uhuru’s Kenyatta’s TNA. In its evidence CORD says Nicholas Alexander Nissbit (A Kencall Director) does not deny the fact that both the IEBC and TNA were hosted and operated on a single IP address as has been claimed by CORD. They also will provide proof that Kencall EPZ Limited, in reality was a call centre that was used as a gateway that linked the First Respondent’s database titled African Focus and accessed through the following web address or URL https://www.intranet.kencall/apps/iebc and The National Alliance (TNA) database known as Market Race CRM and accessed through the web address or URL https://www.intranet.kencall/apps/tna.

b) The IEBC by agreeing to this arrangement compromised the elections on the basis of requirements for a an impartial, neutral, transparent, efficient, accurate, accountable and verifiable manner.

e. IEBC System Failure Explanation – NOT FACTUAL

a) Claims made by the IEBC have no basis whatsoever as regards to alleged failure of the technology according to CORD’s expert witness affidavits. One expert describes the IEBC claim that the server failed as “entirely preposterous”.

b) CORD’s Spanish expert’s affidavit describes as either “pure fiction” or “entirely inconceivable” IEBC’s claim that the batteries of the hand held devises used at the polling stations for bio metric identification of voters either failed or were not charged or could not hold charge for a sufficient period of time

c) The CORD experts’ affidavits will also present evidence to show that IEBC claims that the transmission system failed due to data overload has no basis in technology terms in this day and age.

d) CORD also questions IEBC claims that their officers has forgotten passwords does not make sense as there exist mechanism in place for password reminder which standard technology industry practice as seen worldwide on social network websites like Facebook.

e) CORD will also present a sworn affidavit by an International Technology expert who states “This system in my personal knowledge, has the capability to deliver up the election result within a period of around 4 hours with very negligible error”.

f. Voter Registrar:

The Petitioner also contends that:

i. IEBC has failed to present a closed register for the March 4th Elections.

ii. IEBC resolve that “a special register is to be generated and will be used to allow the voters to vote” but never presented any proof or minutes of a meeting where this special register was finally approved and when it was gazette.

iii. A questionable voters register cannot be a foundation of a free and fair election conducted in accordance with the law.

iv. IEBC own staff and figures show incidents where IEBC allowed votes that exceeded the number of registered. This latter category of incidents include; Lomerimeri polling station in Tiaty Constituency where the form 36 itself shows 68 registered voters against 163 valid votes cast; King’atua Primary School in Lari Constituency where the form 36 itself shows 319 registered voters against 762 valid votes cast; Boroon Primary School in Marakwet West Constituency where the form 36 itself shows 218 registered voters against 228 valid votes cast.

CORD petition through various documents finally seeks to show that President Elect Uhuru Kenyatta did not meet the 50 + 1 threshold, and the declaration by IEBC was the result of inaccurate tallying and unwarranted additional votes

PETITION COMMUNICATION TEAM LIAISON
maka
#116 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 6:11:45 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 4/22/2010
Posts: 11,522
Location: Nairobi
McReggae wrote:
From underwhelming to overwhelming????

what is?
possunt quia posse videntur
maka
#117 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 6:13:40 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 4/22/2010
Posts: 11,522
Location: Nairobi
kiriita wrote:
Question: Petition No 3/13 was lodged on March 14, Petition No 4/13 on March 15 and Petition No 5/13 on March 16. They've now been consolidated with Petition No 5/13 as the 'mother file'. So what's the last day for delivery of the ruling considering the cap of 14 days from the filing date?

The mother file is the lead file and all matters relating to timelines oscillate around that file
possunt quia posse videntur
Shak
#118 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 6:14:28 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 2/22/2009
Posts: 2,449
Location: Africa
blah blah blah... fast forward please
maka
#119 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 6:17:48 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 4/22/2010
Posts: 11,522
Location: Nairobi
Shak wrote:
blah blah blah... fast forward please

to Thursday?
possunt quia posse videntur
KulaRaha
#120 Posted : Monday, March 25, 2013 6:20:50 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/26/2007
Posts: 6,514
So, in the humble opinion of Wazuans, how is Mr. Ahmednassir faring so far?

Please give a score out of 10 with NO EXPLANATION.

Perhaps I can start at 2/10.
Business opportunities are like buses,there's always another one coming
16 Pages«<1011121314>»
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.

Copyright © 2026 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.