Achiek tho
Level: Imperial Majesty
Posts: 2583
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 6:46 pm
Location: Tabora TZ


Unread post by Achiek tho » Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:57 am

Pweeeeee burukenge can't get a break :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Paul muite still can't get over his lose at the supreme court :lol: :lol: :lol:
He went back to court and maraga and Mwili gives him kichapo again...wembe bado ni use use supreme court

Tho Awuoro :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ... e_c1649536

Who? When? Where? Mwilu and Muite trade words over IEBC case

Supreme Court judges were yesterday drawn into a heated argument with IEBC lawyers as they sought to understand what commission Wafula Chebukati wants clarified.

Chebukati wants the court to clarify if he has powers to correct errors and amend Forms 34A and B. The court is expected to rule tomorrow if it has jurisdiction to hear the case. Lawyer Paul Muite, who is representing the electoral agency, told the court, “Your judgement has caused confusion�. This did not go down well with the judges.

“This is not an appeal of Maina Kiai’s case. Where is the problem between the Maina Kiai case and what we said? Can you put it in a language that we can understand? Because until now, I honestly do not know where the problem is,� Deputy Chief Justice Philemon Mwilu said.

Muite answered, “We want clarity in your judgment :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: . Which forms should Wafula Chebukati rely on. Is it Forms 34A or 34B.�

The lawyer said while the Court of Appeal was clear results announced at the polling stations are final and cannot be altered or changed, the the judges who rendered a majority decision faulted the chairman for announcing figures without first verifying.

But Mwilu said she cannot recall, where the majority said the commission should verify the results at the national tallying centre. “Did we say, touch or move a coma, change figures? Did we say that in our judgment? Where? I don’t remember saying that and I know I participated in that judgment,� she said.

Mwilu continued, “Where the problem is is what is it that we are required to clarify?�

Muite said, “We are seeking a clarification on how the presidential returning officer should go about the function of verifying the results before announcing the winner.�

At that point, Chief Justice David Maraga asked Muite to read Section 39( 1 ) (c) of the Elections Act which states, “For purposes of a presidential election the Commission shall electronically transmit, in the prescribed form, the tabulated results of an election for the President from a polling station to the constituency tallying centre and to the national tallying centre�.

“Perhaps Chief Justice should explain what you mean by simple,� Muite responded after Maraga told him, it was that simple.

Kamau Karori, another lawyer for the IEBC, asked the judges to explain what the chairman should do after verification, while President Uhuru Kenyatta’s lawyer Kiragu Kimani said the issue was serious and the court ought to come out clear to avoid problems in future.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests