Uhuru lawyers urge court to throw out pe­ti­tion with costs

They ar­gue that no bal­lot­ing laws were vi­o­lated dur­ing Au­gust 8 elec­tions

Business Daily (Kenya) - - TOP NEWS - Brian Wa­suna bwa­suna@ke.na­tion­media.com

At­ten­tion turns to the seven Supreme Court judges after lawyers wrapped up their case on the pres­i­den­tial elec­tion pe­ti­tion yes­ter­day. The judges have up to Fri­day to de­cide whether to up­hold Pres­i­dent Uhuru Keny­atta’s win or or­der for fresh polls.

Yes­ter­day, Mr Keny­atta’s lawyers asked the court to throw out the pe­ti­tion with costs, say­ing no bal­lot­ing laws were vi­o­lated as claimed by the Op­posi- tion. Lawyers Fred Nga­tia and Ahmed­nasir Ab­dul­lahi ar­gued that the only rea­son the court can in­val­i­date the dis­puted re­sults is on grounds of abuse of rules by vot­ers, and not the polls body.

They said that the In­de­pen­dent Elec­toral and Bound­aries Com­mis­sion (IEBC) com­plied with all le­gal re­quire­ments in con­duct­ing the Gen­eral Elec­tion.

“For you to in­val­i­date the elec­tion you must tell the 17 mil­lion peo­ple who voted that they trans­gressed. Mr Odinga has to sat­isfy you that a per­son who was not en­ti­tled to ex­er­cise their right to vote did so and that’s the only way you can in­val­i­date this elec­tion,” said Mr Ab­dul­lahi.

Mr Nga­tia ar­gued that the IEBC en­sured that all vot­ers were au­tho­rised by law to do so, and that the polls were through se­cret bal­lot as pro­vided for by the Con­sti­tu­tion.

He fur­ther de­nied the ex­is­tence of a math­e­mat­i­cal for­mula said to have been used to ma­nip­u­late the re­sults to guar­an­tee Mr Keny­atta a vic­tory with 11 per cent more votes than his closes ri­val.

Op­po­si­tion leader Raila Odinga has chal­lenged Mr Keny­atta’s win cit­ing tal­ly­ing ir­reg­u­lar­i­ties.

One of his lawyers, Otiende Amollo, on Mon­day said the IEBC used a math­e­mat­i­cal for­mula to ma­nip­u­late the re­sults in favour of Mr Keny­atta.

The for­mula, Mr Otiende added, when placed on a graph, pro­duces a straight line which he said is a sta­tis­ti­cal im­pos­si­bil­ity when tal­ly­ing re­sults stream­ing in ran­domly from dif­fer­ent parts of the coun­try.

Mr Nga­tia sub­mit­ted over­views by in­ter­na­tional ob­servers, par­tic­u­larly for­mer United States pres­i­den­tial can­di­date John Kerry who gave a clean bill of health to the polls.


“The for­mula pre­sented by the pe­ti­tioner has no bear­ing on the elec­tions be­cause its ap­pli­ca­tion is known only to the au­thor. There was no pre­de­ter­mined math­e­mat­i­cal method used,” said Mr Nga­tia.

Mr Ab­dul­lahi, in wrap­ping up their ar­gu­ments told the seen­judge bench that the IEBC com­plied with the Con­sti­tu­tion and the pe­ti­tioner was seek­ing the in­val­i­da­tion of a process that was valid.


IN SES­SION From left: Nasa lead­ers Moses We­tang’ula, Kalonzo Musyoka and Raila Odinga dur­ing the hear­ing of the pres­i­den­tial elec­tion at the Supreme Court yes­ter­day.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Kenya

© PressReader. All rights reserved.