In view of the latest developments in the political situation in Kenya, fraught with peril, one has the right to wonder whether the extremely rare, if not the only decision in the world of this institution, was relevant and valid in pure law, politically correct, in the sense noble of the term, and socially conceivable, coming mainly from the guards of the National Building, supported by the constitution. It should be remembered that the Constitution remains the backbone of all the laws of a country and the Supreme Court in charge of looking after it and its integrity, remains the incubating mother of all citizens and their collective and individual rights to through fair justice for all.
In this context the exercise of the vote remains a major right of the citizen which allows him to freely give his point of view on the affairs and the march of his country, during Local or national Elections, programmed, planned, by the State and the various actors, according to the Law and well-defined rules of the game and known to all citizens aware of their status. So it’s a two-part process that’s important to distinguish. On the one hand the electoral system which defines the set of rules and which presents more stakes for the parties in the fight against the Vote and the Vote itself which is the most decisive phase and therefore the most important for any referee or observer of the democratic game
Moreover, if this last phase opens freely with the participation of the Actors, without hindrance for the citizen to exercise his right, the Actors tacitly recognize the validity and the overtaking for the first phase, which does not exclude all possibilities of to make subsequent legal remedies. This vote often takes place with failings of the Administration in places or with clashes between Zealous militants but as long as it does not stop the process, it is difficult and unfair to cancel the right of this citizen who has shown abnegations and sacrifices to fulfill his civic obligations. That is why international observers are very vigilant on this issue using the polished formula “incidents or failures that do not affect the regularity of the vote”.
“Unfortunately in Africa, it is less the regularity of the vote that is contested than the result of the vote and this even before the provisional proclamation of the results; everyone rejoices and announces the victory.”
Unfortunately in Africa, it is less the regularity of the vote that is contested than the result of the vote and this even before the provisional proclamation of the results; everyone rejoices and announces the victory. It is at this moment that the emotion invades the whole country including, voters and non-voters who quickly, become aware of their existence as a citizen and position themselves in relation to their concerns and opportunities; the latter, less interested in politics, are often more numerous at gatherings, more zealous to occupy the spittoon, or furnish the gallery with protesting actions. Thus, as soon as the Provisional Results are proclaimed, the vanquished party naturally endeavors to demonstrate its popularity, which is often not that of the Urns, by calling for street mobilizations with the often unfortunate complicity of the Media.
As such the human tide drained by Odinga the day after the proclamation of the Results, did not depart from the rule and did not fail to make skeptical when the victory of Uhuru Kenyatta and influence the decision also cavalier that unseemly 7 wise. It is this same mobilization that was noted after the decision of the 7 wise men, so why Odinga is not reassured of his victory to the point of opting for the boycott?
It is clear that Odinga is not sure of his victory which is not given by those who are in political parties as we tend to believe but rather by the rural population. In my opinion the 7 sages acted under the influence of the emotion and made a decision unpublished with regard to Elections but especially of Right: a total cancellation of Elections of which we do not ignore the motives otherwise we take refuge behind a laconic slogan of “unreliable elections”? Is it the system if yes should not give enough time then to resume everything? Is it the vote, if so, is it possible that the vote could be tainted throughout the Territory to the point of canceling without discrimination? Are these falsified Minutes? Did not the vote take place throughout the country in the presence of political party representatives and observers? What about the opinions of foreign observers? No, there is enough to pull one’s hair to understand and accept that political elections can be totally canceled by a legal institution was it a Supreme Court, in defiance of all the opinions of all other institutions directly involved throughout the process and in defiance of the charges on the taxpayer: This is an opportunity to see potential drifts of the independence of justice in Africa where the vast site of good citizenship is still fallow. In the end, the Supreme Court of Kenya did worse than that of Côte d’Ivoire, which only partially canceled the vote in certain constituencies. More seriously, Law’s arguments on the pleadings of the opposition, articulated in form or in substance, which could base a decision as serious as dangerous for the stability of the country, were not brought to the attention of opinion. Then one seems to remain in the general turmoil resulting from the irrationality of the results, characteristic of Elections of this nature and incapable of detaching itself from this torpor that distils the movements of crowd and preventing to take in all serenity and lucidity, the right decision, in accordance with the law. Some
Senegalese quickly weaved laurels prematurely to Magistrates of Kenya whose decision, because it suffers from political maturity and professionalism, risks leading the country in an indescribable chaos even the partition . It is the place to pay tribute to the Senegalese Judiciary in General and to the Sages of our Supreme Court who act in wise, in the serenity and the lucidity, in all responsibility in spite of the attacks and pressures which they are the object in situations crucial, like those of 2012 for the third term of Wade, 2016 for the unconstitutionality of the voluntarist reduction of the Presidential Mandate by Macky, outside a referendum. Our Headquarters Magistrates with their skills and expertise must continue to deserve our trust and be proud of our country, our legendary Democracy, all of us are wood.
By Walmack Political Observer / email@example.com