Azimio accuse Supreme Court of failing to satisfy requirements of fair trial
Leaders from the Azimio One Kenya Coalition have expressed their dissatisfaction with full judgement of the Supreme Court accusing it of failing to be impartial and providing a judgement that lacked rationale and integrity.
Raila Odinga and Martha Karua who were the first petitioners in the case, stated that the judgement lacked jurisprudential value and was nothing but “hot air.”
“In our view, and we feel entitled to use the language of the Court, the full decision lacks merit and is plainly “hot air.” We accordingly reiterate our objections to the reasoning of the judges,” the two said in a statement released by Azimio.
According to Azimio, the seven bench judges did not perform their arbitrary role and instead were preferential, unfair and acted as opponents by totally disregarding the evidence tabled to the court.
The coalition further questioned IEBC Chairperson’s role in relation to that of the commissioners further pointing that Wafula Chebukati’s ‘criminal conduct’ was sufficient ground to nullify the presidential election.
Azimio additionally faulted the Supreme Court for overlooking the illegal conduct of the Chairperson of the IEBC, Wafula Chebukati.
“…the Court clearly establishes the illegal conduct by Wafula Chebukati, the Chairperson of the IEBC,” Odinga and Karua claimed.
“On the other hand, however, the Court overlooks this critical finding and excuses Chebukati despite the glaring violations of the Constitution and the law,” Raila and Karua went on to state in a jointly signed statement.
They questioned the court’s logic for thwarting their petition while at the same time recognizing IEBC’s structural problems by recommending organisational reforms.
“It is unthinkable that such a mortally dysfunctional could have conducted a free and fair election,” the coalition stated.
Azimio echoed its commitment to pursue legal justice after having been let down by the highest court in the country.
