Extracts of the CORD petition – What Raila Odinga is asking Kenya’s Supreme Court to do

Raila Odinga - A desperate man

Raila Odinga – A desperate man

What the Petitioner (Hon. RailaOdinga)is asking the court to do:
1. Set aside the results of the Presidential election as announced by IEBC on
9March 2013, and the declaration of Uhuru Kenyatta as President-elect and
William Ruto as Deputy President-elect respectively, and declare asnull and
void the whole electoral process leading to that declaration.
What the petition says:
• There was no free or fair presidential elections. Consequently no
government could lawfully be formed by or from the purported declaration on
9th March 2013, of Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto as President-elect and
Deputy President-elect respectively, by the IEBC and its chairman to the
dishonor of the Kenyan people.
• The voter register was severally altered as to make it difficult to tell
which one was used finally. For the purposes of the 4th March elections the
registration of voters was carried out between 19November 2012 to 18th
December, 2012, at the end of which the IEBC announced that 14,337,399
persons had registered as voters.
• In breach of the mandatory legal requirement, the IEBC has falsely,
unlawfully and illegally in flagrant disregard of the law and its declaration
of the result of the presidential election held on the 4th March, 2013
reflected the total number of registered voters as 14,352,533 well above the
total number of registered voters as the date of closing of registration on
18th December, 2013. Indeed, during February 2013, the IEBC announced
that they had discovered approximately 20,000 persons who had double
registered in the December registration, and accordingly reduced the
register tally to 14,267,572 voters as displayed on its website. The illegally
inflated March 2013 register exceeded this corrected figure by some 85,000
voterS
• The Petitioner avers that increasing the number of registered voters was
intended to permit the IEBC to manipulate the presidential election held on
4th March, 2013 and their purported results and declaration, on 9th March,
2013 was null and void. That by abandoning the process of electronic
identification at the polling stations and releasing results based not on the
safeguarded, agreed, determined and credible electoral process it had
promised and committed to, and by which legitimate expectations accrued, but
a process that failed so significantly, substantially and endemically, IEBC
effectively failed to reflect the will of the Kenyan people at the election.
• Arising from the acts and omissions of the IEBC, Hon. RailaOdinga and
indeed the people of Kenya, were deprived of a free and fair election devoid
of manipulation, an expectation which was denied, thereby irreparably
undermining the entire process and result as declared on 9th March, 2013.
• Because of the IEBC and its chairman’s acts and omissions, the electoral
process and the outcome thereof is so flawed in so fundamental and grave a
sense, taken together or viewed separately, that it is difficult to tell
whether the results were the true, lawful and proper expression of the
Kenyan people’s will.
• The EVID and BVR system and the electronic results transmission systems
adopted by the First Respondent were so poorly selected, designed and
implemented that they were destined to fail from inception, to the knowledge
of the IEBC; the failure and collapse, on a catastrophic scale on the polling
day, so fundamentally changed the system of polling and the number of
votes cast, owing to inordinate and inexplicable delays at the polling stations
thereby reverting Kenya to the discredited manual system, with all the
attendant risks and opportunities for abuse and manipulation which in fact
took place.
• The IEBC and its chairman’s purported official tally of registered voters
inexplicably and mysteriously grew overnight by a large proportion on the eve
of the election, notwithstanding that registration had closed some thirty
days and was by law not permitted to be opened or changed.
• The results as declared and recorded by IEBC contained wide spread
instances of manipulation of the returns through manipulation of Form 36
and in some instances the votes cast exceeding the numbers of registered
voters, in flagrant breach of the fundamental Constitutional principles (see
examples below).
• Although a common register was to be – and indeed was – compiled for all
the six levels of elections in the general elections of 4th March, 2013, it
turned out from the results declared by IEBC that the total number of
registered voters and votes cast in respect of the presidential elections in
some instances exceeded that of the registered voters and those cast for
Parliamentary elections after taking due account of any spoilt or rejected or
disputed votes to the detriment of RailaOdinga. The numerous instances of
huge discrepancies in the total numbers of votes declared by the First and
Second Respondent in the presidential election held on 4th March, 2013 is
inexplicable upon any reasonable hypothesis other than the existence of
actual ballot stuffing, multiple voting or gerrymandering or inflating of the
numbers of votes in the tallying thereof by the IEBC or their officers or
their condoning of or connivance in the same to the advantage of Uhuru and
Ruto thereby rendering their alleged win invalid, illegal, null and void.
Anecdotal examples of widespread anomalies:
Glaring anomalies were observed in the process from voter registration, to
transmission of results, to tallying.
(a) the result were declared on the basis of unsigned Form 36,
(b) multiplicity of Form 36, and variants of entries in some constituencies
(c) alterations on files and
(d) brazen disregard by the IEBC of the entries on the files of
constituencies which were eventually reflected in the final tally of
Presidential election results and which were announced without signed
verification Form 34s.
Votes cast exceeded the number of registered voters, including Tiaty,
Laisamis, Igembe Central, Buri, Chuka, IburiIgambaNgombe, Lari, Kapenguria,
Saboti, Turbo, Marakwet West, Kajiado West, Bomet East, Mt Elgon, Langata
and Aldai.
Results in Form 36 disclosed by the First Respondent were materially
different from the results that were posted in the final tally of the
presidential results published by the First Respondent. This included in
Webuye East, Webuye West and Igembe Constituencies.
Registered voter numbers in polling stations were inflated in Form 34
contrary to what was contained in Form 36. These included Kaproi Nursery
School, Metipso Primary School, Maina Primary School, asaibul Primary School,
Sewerwa Nursery School, Liter Secondary School, Chesongoch Catholic
Church, Mungiwa Primary School, Chawich Primary School and Lemeuywo
Primary School. In most of those circumstances, more votes were cast than
the total number of registered voters.
More than two Form 36 reflecting different returns. These included Kikuyu
Constituency, Juja Constituency, Chuka Constituency, Thika Constituency.
Alterations in Form 36 without acknowledgment including Kiambaa and Limuru
Constituencies.
More valid votes cast in some constituencies reflected in Forms 36 than in
Form 34 including in Chesumei, Emngwen and Ainamoi.
Different entries in two Forms 36 submitted in respect of the same
constituency for example in Mathira Constituency.
Published results materially different from the results reflected in the
County tallying, for example in Nakuru, not to mention the material variation
between the verbal declaration made by the various Commissioners of IEBC
at the national tallying centre allegedly after verification of results and the
fiinal figures which are set out by the IEBC including those of South Imenti,
Igembe South, Lagdera, North Imenti, Central Imenti, Boment East and
Sigor.
***
Highlights/Quotes from the affidavit
” I believe that First and Second Respondents in breach of the Constitution,
failed to establish systems which are accurate, secure, verifiable,
accountable and/or transparent and indeed declared results which in many
instances had no relation to votes cast at the polling station, developed
methods which were opaque and intended to manipulate the results in the
course of which the Petitioners’ representatives were altogether excluded
from the process.”
” In the final tally, the total number of votes cast in the Presidential
Elections differed materially from those declared by the First and Second
Respondents for purposes of the Gubernatorial and Parliamentary elections
which took place on the same date clearly attesting to my belief that
massive electoral fraud and malpractice occurred or permitted to occur by
the First and Second Respondents in contravention of the requirements of
the Constitution and the legislative framework in place as regards the 4th
March, 2013 presidential election.”
Highlights/quotes from the petition/re electronic system:
“its failure and collapse, on a catastrophic scale on the polling day, so
fundamentally changed the system of polling and the number of votes cast,
owing to inordinate and inexplicable delays at the polling stations thereby
reverting Kenya to the discredited manual system, with all the attendant
risks and opportunities for abuse and manipulation which in fact took place; ”
“Respondents in breach of the Constitution, failed to establish systems
which are accurate, secure, verifiable, accountable and/or transparent and
indeed declared results which in many instances had no relation to votes cast
at the polling station, developed methods which were opaque and intended to
manipulate the results in the course of which the Petitioners’ representatives
were altogether excluded from the process.”
“the numerous instances of huge discrepancies in the total numbers of votes
declared by the First and Second Respondent in the presidential election held
on 4th March, 2013 is inexplicable upon any reasonable hypothesis other than
the existence of actual ballot stuffing, multiple voting or gerrymandering or
inflating of the numbers of votes in the tallying”
“A curious and very concerning feature of the First Respondent’s conduct
was that it allowed Kencall to co-host both its server and that of the TNA,
which of course may compromise the integrity of the electoral process but at
very least gives the very real impression that the TNA has access to sort of
information which is at the very least initially confidential to the First
Respondent”

© 2013, John Kamau. All rights reserved. – The views expressed here are purely those of the author and not necessarily those of the publishers. – Newstime Africa content cannot be reproduced in any form – electronic or print – without prior consent of the Publishers. Copyright infringement will be pursued and perpetrators prosecuted.

1,255 total views, 35 views today

Comments