Kenyan Supreme Court Case of Raila Odinga v. Uhuru Kenyatta [2013] at paragraphs 303, 304, 306 and 307 of its Judgment: ‘[303]… by no means can the conduct of this election be said to have been perfect… [304] Did the Petitioner clearly and decisively show that the conduct of the election to have been so devoid of merits, and so distorted, as not to reflect the expression of the people’s electoral intent? It is this broad test that should guide us in this kind of case, in deciding whether we should disturb the outcome of the Presidential election. [306] … In summary, the evidence, in our opinion, does not disclose any profound irregularity in the management of the electoral process, nor does it gravely impeach the mode of participation in the electoral process by any of the candidates who offered himself or herself before the voting public. It is not evident, on the facts of this case, that the candidate declared as the President-elect had not obtained the basic vote-threshold justifying his being declared as such. [307] We will, therefore, disallow the Petition, and uphold the Presidential election results as declared by IEBC on 9th March, 2013.’ (Willy Mutunga C.J). #IT WAS A BIOMETRIC PROCESS#
Posted on: Sat, 03 Aug 2013 12:00:51 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015