This reverses President Uhuru Kenyatta's 54 percent win over his rival, Mr. Raila Odinga. The 4-2 court ruling was an outcome of a petition filed by Mr. Odinga, who alleged widespread fraud in the election, including the hacking of the electoral commission's computer system.
Following the judgment, Mr. Odinga raised his fists in the air in celebration. "This is indeed a very historic day for the people of Kenya and by extension to the people of the continent of Africa," Mr. Odinga said outside the courthouse.
For the first time in the history of African democratization, a ruling has been made by a court, nullifying an election of a sitting president.
When the Supreme court ruled against him in 2013, Mr. Odinga dismissed it as inept and even as he appealed in this election, he said he had little faith in the court. He had called for a national strike, which failed to materialize.
On the other hand, President Uhuru Kenyatta immediately pledged to respect the court's decision and indicated he is heading to the new polls with the same agenda that got him elected for the first time. "The court has made its decision. We respect it. We don't agree with it," he said, calling for peace. "That is the nature of democracy."
In describing the results of the election as "invalid, null and void," Chief Justice David Maraga promised to issue full details of the ruling later.
"Taking the totality of the entire evidence, we are satisfied that the elections were not conducted in the accordance to the dictates of the Constitution," he said.
Kenya's election commission admitted that there had been a hacking attempt on its computer system but maintained it was unsuccessful. International observers had said there were no signs of interference with the vote.
The lawyer for the Commission, Mr. Paul Muite, argued during the hearing that the integrity of the vote had been protected "as far as was humanly possible."
Odinga's lawyer, however, countered that some 5 million votes were marred by discrepancies and the forms used to record results lacked key security features such as watermarks and the necessary stamps and signatures.
According to Murithi Mutiga, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group, the decision is unprecedented for the whole continent and will set an important precedent.
"It's not very often you find a decision of such import going against an incumbent - it was really thoroughly unexpected," he said. "I think this is an incredibly important moment for democracy for Africa."
No comments:
Post a Comment