By EMMANURL TOILI etoili@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted Monday, March 25 2013 at 12:30
The Supreme Court will on Monday at 3pm deliver its verdict on the inclusion of the Attorney General and the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) in presidential petitions as amicus curiae or a friend of the court and also to hear the Jubilee lawyers on the new evidence presented by the Cord Coalition.In his opening remarks, Chief Justice Willy Mutunga said the judges will be objective in its ruling on the petition."We as judges are servants of the law. We shall be objective," he said."Supreme court to remain objective. Public should trust us to do our job. Justice should manifest to be done," he added.Dr Mutunga also urged Kenyans to accept the final decision that will be arrived at by the Supreme Court and move on."Whatever decision emerges from this petition, we must march forward," he said.While addressing the court, Attorney General Githu Muigai sought to be enjoined in the petition as amicus curiae or a friend of the court."We can only be enjoined in the case on the discretion of the Court," said AG Muigai.However, Mr Odinga has filed an objection to the Attorney General joining the presidential petition.
Posted Monday, March 25 2013 at 12:30
The Supreme Court will on Monday at 3pm deliver its verdict on the inclusion of the Attorney General and the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) in presidential petitions as amicus curiae or a friend of the court and also to hear the Jubilee lawyers on the new evidence presented by the Cord Coalition.In his opening remarks, Chief Justice Willy Mutunga said the judges will be objective in its ruling on the petition."We as judges are servants of the law. We shall be objective," he said."Supreme court to remain objective. Public should trust us to do our job. Justice should manifest to be done," he added.Dr Mutunga also urged Kenyans to accept the final decision that will be arrived at by the Supreme Court and move on."Whatever decision emerges from this petition, we must march forward," he said.While addressing the court, Attorney General Githu Muigai sought to be enjoined in the petition as amicus curiae or a friend of the court."We can only be enjoined in the case on the discretion of the Court," said AG Muigai.However, Mr Odinga has filed an objection to the Attorney General joining the presidential petition.
AG Muigai also argues that his appearance in
petition is not to support any party but to lay down law as it is with
authorities from across the globe."The AG's role is to elucidate on legal issues, not to support any side," he said.However, IEBC boss Issack Hassan's lawyer
Ahmednassir Abdullahi said his client had no objection with the
appearance of AG in the petition.Lawyers Katwa Kigen and Fred Ngatia also have no objection to AG being enjoined in the petition.Notably, lawyer Kethi Kilonzo for Africog argued
that issues before court do not require an interpretation of the law to
warrant inclusion of the AG.However, Cord's lawyer George Oraro argued that the AG has applied to be enjoined without request from the court or any party."The AG has misinterpreted circumstances under which he can apply to be enjoined in cases before court," he said."An election petition is not a civil proceeding.
The government is not defined in the Constitution but state is defined,"
he added.Mr Oraro argued that in relation to this petition the AG can be enjoined by the Constitution to assist the IEBC.However, AG Muigai disagreed with Mr Oraro and argued that the petition was a civil matter.AG Muigai argued that as amicus curiae, his office will not impose views on the court hearing Cord's petition against President-elect Uhuru Kenyatta."I have not advised the president-elect, contrary to claims by lawyer George Oraro," he said.Lawyer A.B Shah also lodged an application for the
Law Society of Kenya (LSK) to be enjoined in the petitions before the
Supreme Court as amicus curiae.
However, LSK faced opposition on its application to be enjoined as amicus curiae in presidential petitions by parties before Supreme Court.
Mr Oraro opposed the inclusion of the LSK in petition arguing that the society is partisan.Lawyer Fred Ngatia representing Jubilee Coalition also opposed inclusion of LSK as amicus curiae the society was an observer in the General Election.Mr Ngatia also argued that LSK is on record 'supporting a petitioner.'During the submission, political activist Nazlin
Umar disrupted court proceedings for several minutes at the Supreme
Court as she attempted to address judges over an application she had
filed.Ms Umar said as the "Wanjiku's" lawyer, she was disappointed that her application has been ignored.However, Dr Mutunga said that the Supreme Court
will not hear or deal with any petitions, requests or submissions that
were done past the allowed time.
Petition consolidation
During the submissions, Jubilee's lawyer Mr Ngatia
argued that a couple of preliminary issues had to be addressed before
the hearing of the petition.Also, AG Muigai advised the court to give the
parties involved time to come up with a conclusive mechanism of what may
be required for progress.Mr Ngatia argued that the petition by Cord only raised one issue."The court should consolidate all the petitions
and marry all the related issues raised by petitioners and respondents,"
he said.Lawyer Njoroge Regeru argued that the petitions
consolidation were sensible and will lead to arguable case and speedy
resolution.Africog's Counsel Keth Kilonzo also argued that
matters of fact and matters of law should be consolidated to allow a
reasonable suit.However, Mr Oraro said the consolidation of the cases including respondent number three may not hold.Mr Ngatia noted that petitions 4 and 5 had similar issues, contest and engagement and thus could be consolidated.Lawyer Ahmednassir Abdullahi also argued that petition number 5 bore more weight than 3 and 4 and should be given preference.
Petition mutations
Mr Ahmednasir also asked the court to give directions on the type of petitions to be followed.Mr Ahmednasir argued that his client, Mr Issack
Hassan was concerned with continued mutation of the presidential
petitions, hence, affecting its expediency.Mr Ngatia also requested the court to give guidance on the petitions to avoid the mutations."There's new evidence being introduced and this
means the defence teams must be given time to respondents to all
affidavits," he said."There are 122 new electoral areas that are being
introduced by the petitioner which bears grave consequences on time," he
added.However, Mr Oraro argued that it is within the provisions of law to file new evidence as the hearing continues.On his side, lawyer Harun Ndubi argued that the introduction of affidavits is important at any point.The judges, led by Dr Mutunga, could either
dismiss the petition, order a re-count of the presidential votes, settle
on a re-run, or rule that the whole process begins afresh with the
registration of voters.The actual hearings of the petition are expected to start on Thursday and could continue un-interrupted until concluded.
Apart from the petition filed by Cord's
presidential candidate Mr Raila Odinga challenging the declaration of
Jubilee's candidate Mr Uhuru Kenyatta as winner of the presidential
election, there is another filed by a civil society group, the African
Centre for Open Governance (Africog).Also before the court is a petition filed by some
members of Mr Kenyatta’s campaign team, social media activists Dennis
Itumbi and Moses Kuria and a third person, challenging the inclusion of
spoilt ballots in the calculation of votes attained by each candidate.
The objections raised by Mr Kenyatta and Deputy
President-elect Mr William Ruto, the Independent Electoral and
Boundaries Commission (IEBC) and its chairman Issack Hassan, will also
be narrowed down to what will be argued verbally in court.
No comments:
Post a Comment