Why Raila challenged Uhuru’s win

NAIROBI, KENYA: Prime Minister Raila Odinga challenged the declaration of Uhuru Kenyatta as President-elect at the Supreme Court seeking fresh presidential elections through invalidation of the March 4 poll.

The Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD) presidential candidate race also wanted the court to declare the entire voters’ register as well as the election itself flawed.

The PM stated in his petition that the 2013 elections were poorly conducted and contravened the law.

Senior counsel George Oraro presented to the court that evidence of results reflected on Forms 34 and 36 presented by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).

Oraro said from the forms, it was clear Uhuru’s votes were intentionally inflated while those of Raila were reduced in an apparent trend to ‘meet a given threshold’.

Oraro said it was clear that over 11,000 votes cast in favour of Raila were deducted while at the same time increasing Uhuru’s votes by 7,215.

• .

  Keep Reading

• 
  No nightclub in Uhuru Park, LSK and Greenbelt now warn Sakaja
• 
  Nightclub, dancing fountain to be constructed at Uhuru Park- Sakaja
• 
  Firm linked to fake fertiliser calls for arrest of Linturi, NCPB boss
• 
  Raila succession saga: Inside ODM's turbulent journey

He said a scrutiny of the forms indicated that Uhuru’s votes were inflated in transfer of information from Forms 34 to 36 and also the final presidential tally published by IEBC.

Forms 34 are declarations of results in respect of a polling centre for the presidential election.  The document also details the total number of registered voters at the polling station, valid votes cast, number cast in favour of each candidate, and rejected and disputed votes.

However, Form 36 is a declaration of the aggregate tally from a constituency and county. Oraro also complained that IEBC deliberately dropped the electronic voter transmission system as required by the Constitution, adding that political party agents were also thrown out of the tallying centre.

Quoting Regulation 85 of the Election Act, Oraro maintained that authorised political party agents are allowed by law to access the tallying centre, but IEBC resorted to what he termed as unilateral tallying. The counsel said according to instructions to returning officers contained in the poll books, electronic transmission of results is mandatory.