Former Kenyan envoy to China says votes were doctored in favour of his Jubilee rival

Former Kenyan envoy to China Julius Sunkuli on Monday told a court that results declaring Gideon Konchellah winner of the August 8 parliamentary elections were doctored.

Tesifying in a Kericho court, Mr Sunkuli accused the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) of altering poll results in favour of Mr Konchella.

Sunkuli had vied for the seat on a Kanu party ticket but lost to Konchella, who vied through Jubilee Party.

The former ambassador contested IEBC's copies of forms 35A presented in court, which he said were different from what was provided to him.

He said the results were altered in favor of Jubilee and Konchella.

"We requested IEBC to deposit original copies of forms 35A. However, the forms deposited in court, though certified, were different from what we were supplied with," said Sunkuli.

"I can confirm the data presented by IEBC in their reply and in the forms upon our request coincide. However they were manufactured."

Repeat polls

Sunkuli, who wants the court to declare Konchella's election null and void, and to order repeat polls in the area, emerged second with 17,160 votes against Konchellah's 23,812.

In his petition filed on September 5, Sunkuli claims the election was marred by irregularities and was not free and fair.

Sunkuli told the court yesterday that IEBC failed to announce results in more than 100 polling stations that had irregularities. The failure, he said, translated to more than 7,740 votes.

The former legislator said some of his agents were denied access to polling stations despite having proper accreditation.

But polling station diaries indicate that Sunkuli's agents were at their respective stations as early as 6am, something he refuted.

"My agents were denied access to the polling stations, while in others, they were allowed later in the day despite having proper accreditation. But the story is different - from the IEBC record, they were in by 6am. To me, the recording is not correct," he said.

Serial numbers

Sunkuli said other forms 35A had differences in the serial numbers while others were illegible. He said the illegibility of the forms was deliberate to make room for manipulation.

He said some of the documents could only reveal the names of candidates and were deliberately issued to ensure that they could not adequately argue their case in court.

Sunkuli's application to present to the court copies of forms 35A presented to him by his agents was however dismissed by the court on grounds that it lacked merit.