BY KORIR JUMA,NAIROBI,29TH AUG 2017-Lawyers representing President Uhuru Kenyatta in the ongoing petition challenging his victory in the August 8 elections have dismissed the petition filed by NASA leader Raila Odinga, saying it lacks weight to warrant nullification of an election.
Uhuru’s lawyers led by Fred Ngatia argue that the case is not supported by evidence and therefore should be should be thrown out .While defending his client Ngatia says all pointers have shown that Kenyatta won the exercise squarely .He says results announced from the said election indicated that Kenyatta got majority of votes managing 25% in almost all counties.
Ngatia says even the observers report gave the election a clean bill of health terming claims raised by NASA lawyers that the elections was marred by numerous anomalies as false and untrue. ”Reports by the observers show that the electoral process was free fair and credible, a true reflection of the will of kenyans”.he said.
He further submitted that In 93.8% of polling stations, NASA agents signed the declaration of presidential results and therefore it was not possible to change the same results elsewhere.
opposite to claims by NASA lawyers on Monday that there was a formula that was used to give Kenyatta more votes while those of Odinga waere reduced ,Ngatia was categorical that nothing could be far from the truth .”There was no mathematical formula predetermining the final results of Presidential elections 2017”.he said.
Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi said the request by the petitioner to overturn the outcome of the August 8 election was hollow as he had not provided sufficient grounds that could warrant invalidation of the poll outcome.
“Even if the lowest standard of proof is applied, this petition will be dismissed,” Mr Abdulahi said when he started Mr Kenyatta’s reply to the petitioner’s submissions.
He went on: “Even if the electoral commission, Mr Wafula Chebukati and Mr Kenyatta’s evidences were expunged from the record, this petition will still be dismissed.”
The lawyertold the six judges of the Supreme Court that the best evidence by the petitioner had been submitted by his lead lawyer James Orengo, but then, he noted it was not good enough to lead to the nullification of the presidential vote.
“Mr Orengo’s presentation was probably the best piece of evidence from the petitioner. But it was not good enough because it was hearsay…it was not grounded in law but the grievances of losing an election.”
Placing the voter at the centre of his argument, Mr Abdulahi said the major test that confronts the court was to establish whether the Kenyan public had expressed their sovereign will on August 8, arguing that nothing else mattered.
He told the court the foundation of democracy placed the people at the centre of the voting process and this foundation had nothing to do with constitutional, legal technicalities or the commission’s administrative challenges.
“The essence of the vote is about who voted because numbers matter. The most important thing is to show that the winner had the numbers,” he said.
He told the court the principle thing to consider is Kenyans cast their ballots and it mattered little on whether there were challenges with the transmission of results or such other things as stamping of the ballots.
“The approach is not whether IEBC made mistakes. The approach is that the Kenyan people made their choice and this can only be invalidated if the court establishes that there was a fault on the part of the voter,” he said.