Sat, 09 Sep 2017 10:34:20 +0000
Dear Editor,
The constitution of any country, as a grand norm, has to be respected by all citizens.
And as a principal law, it has to thrive on precedence, that what applies to one should also apply to the other.
The unprecedented successful prosecution of the Presidential petition in Kenya is one example, and it is hoped that every peace loving Kenyan regardless, should behave so as to achieve the reasonableness of the verdict for the common good.
Courts are not supposed to make emotional or presumptive rulings, just as much as they don’t’ have to rely on statements made outside court.
During the Kenyan elections, there were speculations of hacking in the electronic system, in reaction to which the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission said the attempted hack did not succeed.
This statement formed the initial basis for doubting the results in the absence of a convincing proof that hacking was completely thwarted, and therefore in Court among many arguments the burden lay heavily on the defence, as any slight omission such as failure to collate electronic figures and those from the polling stations formed a prima facie case.
The Kenyan voters roll is so huge and the process of finalising results is therefore, tedious given the limited time in which the results are supposed to be announced as any delay in doing so would even have been more suspicious and dangerous for the entire election process.
The electoral commission enticed itself by issuing a premature statement of confirming the attempted hacking when they had no capacity to prove that it really failed.
The Supreme Court annulled the elections on the basis of what was presented and found by the four of the six Judges, meaning, there should be a re-run on 17th October, 2017 as set by the Electoral Commission.
The winning petition but losing candidate Mr. Odinga has however put up conditions, one of which is to get rid of electoral commissioners and that they be arrested.
In spite of respecting the verdict on the other side, President Kenyatta has also branded Judges as “Crooks” and that he must fix the rot.
With this scenario at hand, are the Kenyan political players doing justice to the nation, because this may replicate the Zambian, situation where the losing petitioner in the 2016 elections, used unprintables on Judges, similar to those of the Kenyan President.
While the unreasonable conditions of replacing the election body as requested by Mr. Odinga may lead to another disputed elections as time is not there to meet this demand, worse still if he loses again.
With this at hand, will the opposition accept another defeat at the hands of the same electoral commission since the incumbent President insists they should remain in office up to election time.
And should the incumbent President lose in the re-run, will he petition the results before the same Judges he intends to fix should he win.
That is why I may presume, Kenya may not be the same again should the political players decide to take stiff stances in their desire for public office which only require level headedness to preserve peace and tranquility.
Tricky as it may appear now, it is however not an insurmountable situation should both sides of the warrying parties accept that an election is a choice of the public of their preferred candidate and therefore, not both can win at the same time.
In giving this counsel, I am mindful that it can be painful for Kenyatta to lose after winning the earlier election and more painful to Odinga to lose again after trying many times, and that his chances will be as good as diminishing. Though again, one of the two has to lose.
Remember, Mr. Odinga has warned that there will be no sharing of the loaf, so no room for a coalition government.
Adeodatus Matafwali
Lusaka
