In Summary
  • As highlighted in my previous blogs, I still have major reservations about the hacking and algorithm theories
  • I still have major reservations about the hacking and algorithm theories, but IEBC did not help clear matters by stalling the audit access to its technology systems
  • Unless and until this happens, IEBC will continue putting the country in an endless cycle of electioneering, which is, socio-economically speaking, not sustainable

So, the Supreme Court of Kenya ruled on the presidential election petition verdict last Friday, after two weeks of intensive legal arguments and counterarguments.

The country's court of last resort ruled that the presidential election had irregularities and illegalities, necessitating a repeat of the process.

Whereas the court found no evidence of misconduct by the third respondent, President Uhuru Kenyatta, it put the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) squarely on the spot for various acts of omission and commission.

The full judgment is not yet out, but it is clear from the ruling that IEBC did not follow the basic constitutional principles of delivering a free, fair, verifiable and accurate election, as prescribed in Article 86.

Additionally, Section 44 of the 2016 Elections Act says in part:

The Commission shall ensure that the technology in use is simple, accurate, verifiable, secure, accountable and transparent.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court states the IEBC failed, neglected or refused to conduct the Presidential Election in a manner consistent with this legal provision. The court further stated that these acts of omission and commission affected the integrity of the presidential election to the point where it had to nullify the outcome and order fresh elections.

What could have informed the courts to make such far-reaching conclusions, particularly in the light of the fact that the third respondent was found not to be culpable?

DELIBERATE STALLING

Could it be because of hacking? Could it be because of some mysterious algorithm that may have put the third respondent ahead of the petitioner by a fixed margin of 11 per cent?

As highlighted in my previous blogs, I still have major reservations about the hacking and algorithm theories, but IEBC did not help clear matters by stalling on access to its technology systems for audit. 

Page 1 of 2