Kenya Supreme Court: 'No choice but to accept' opposition hacking claims

by Abel Hampton September 21, 2017, 0:17
Kenya Supreme Court: 'No choice but to accept' opposition hacking claims

It made the decision in response to Odinga's petition challenging the official results that Kenyatta won with 54 per cent of the vote.

Providing details today about the ruling that nullified the vote earlier this month, deputy chief justice Philomena Mwilu said the court accepted the opposition's claim that the electronic voting system was "infiltrated and compromised".

It was the first time in Africa that a court had agreed with an opposition demand to cancel a presidential election over rigging allegations.

Mr. Maraga led a six member team of judges to invalidate the August election that put President Uhuru Kenyatta ahead of his NASA opponent, Raila Odinga.

Kenya has the region's richest economy and is a key Western ally in a region often shaken by violence.

The constitution dictates the poll take place within 60 days of the Supreme Court's ruling, which is October 31.

Electoral officials may struggle to meet this deadline as the French firm responsible for the technological systems used for elections has warned it can not be ready in time.

A key hurdle is that the Supreme Court has yet to deliver its full judgment detailing why exactly it chose to annul Kenyatta's victory.

Mwilu also said the IEBC announced results based on tallies documented in the Form 34Bs, totals from constituencies, without having received totals from each polling station, on forms known as 34As.

"The (board) can not therefore be said to have verified the results", she said.

"Noncompliance or failure by the board to do as ordered must be held against it", she said.

In another significant development, opposition MPs boycotted the opening of Parliament to protest against President Uhuru Kenyatta's decision to address it after a court annulled his election win.

"As we have noted, out of 291 forms, 56 from that random sample, no, no, 56 did not have the watermark features, while one did not bear the serial numbers, and a further five were not signed at all", said Maraga.

David Maraga, the chief justice, said threats against judicial staff had risen since the supreme court ruling.

Police used tear gas to disperse opposition and pro-government supporters who had gathered outside the court building while the judgment was read out.

"Senior political leaders have also threatened the judiciary, promising to cut it down to size and teach us a lesson", Maraga said, adding that judges would not be intimidated by anyone and were ready to pay the "ultimate price" to protect the constitution and rule of law.


TOP News

Tracking Jose: Jose Still a Hurricane

Players that will annoy you at the casino

The increase on a real money games at 2015 was 27%

Qatar ready for talks to end Gulf crisis: Emir

Serena Williams' Fiancé Alexis Ohanian Claims "Dad-Life" Is The Best

How you can watch Saul Alvarez vs Gennady Golovkin online

Nicholls leads Mullins in race for Trainers Championship

Game of Thrones season eight to have multiple endings to avoid leaks

No Trust Vote till Sep 20 : Madras HC

Funny stories from casino