Wajir governor under siege, but our courts are useless

Supreme Court Ruling in Petition 7&9 of 2018 Ruling on taking of additional evidence

This opinion critics not the entire Supreme Court Ruling, but the crafting of the final relief. The Ruling’s theory is strong, the premises sound and the jurisprudence transformative. However, the final relief is wanting and naked to mischief. Move with me.

A Petition challenging the election of a Governor of Wajir (GW) is filed. GW is served well on time. One of the main grounds of the Petition is academic (un)qualification of the elected GW. Particulars are pleaded with precision. It established that GW neither sat for “O” level nor “A” level examinations. Nevertheless, GW alleges he possesses a Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees. The period he alleges to have obtained the degree fails to add up. Whereas he purports to have obtained the Bachelor’s Degree on 1st March 2012 and notwithstanding that he never sat for “O” level or “A” level examinations, there are minutes of vetting for position of Ambassador to Riyadh before the Parliamentary Departmental Committee on Defence and Foreign Relations (PDCDFR) on 3rd September, 2014; where he had admitted that he had not acquired a Bachelor’s Degree. Further, later minutes of PDCDFR on the vetting of GW as nominee for the position of Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, indicates that the he“… joined Kampala University to pursue a Bachelor’s degree in business Administration and Post Graduate Diploma in Internal (sic) Relations. He is yet to graduate”. Further, he does not appear anywhere on the graduation list of 1st March 2012.

Despite the weight of evidence above, GW offers neither a specific nor general response to these specific facts. He bungles his defence by filing a Ruling that dismissed a challenge to his qualifications on a technical ground of representation and a letter from Commission for Higher Education that merely recognize Kampala University but not authenticity or otherwise of the GW’s academic certificates. Worse still, he is a no show at the witness dock to shed light on the specific factual issues casting doubt on his qualifications. The High Court draws an adverse inference against him. The Court of Appeal upholds the High Court decision. At the Supreme Court, GW files an Application to be allowed adduction of additional evidence on his academic qualification. In a very robust and lucid Ruling that lay down the governing principles on allowing additional evidence in appellate courts in Kenya, the Supreme Court curiously allows the said Application.

Now, a few issues arise. Where has been this additional evidence all this while? Why was it omitted at the High Court? Why has it resurfaced just now? Why was this Application filed at the earliest opportunity at the Court of Appeal? These questions are imperative as they inform the best relief the Supreme Court ought to have granted in the said Application. There’s nothing dangerous than an affidavit evidence purporting to adduce direct evidence. The Supreme Court does not take direct evidence from witnesses. Assuming questions of authenticity of the documents are raised, how will the Supreme Court deal with such? I have witnessed the impeachment of a purported expert witness on the area of data analysis for want of qualification yet the same witnesses has successfully sworn affidavits purporting to analyze data in the Supreme Court in TWO presidential election petitions! In my view, if the Supreme Court was compelled to allow the Application, it ought to have referred the matter to the High Court to collect the said evidence. This would not have prejudiced the timelines as it would be a 1-2 days event to be completed even before the main Appeal is set for hearing.

Who is this Korani? Is it the Idris case ama? This is too long summarise in bullets

Hii uzembe na ujinga iishe leo

Such is our judiciary

The day is here. Muguruki Makena asking for summary? @pamba naona your influence is spreading fast

Nimesoma hii leo mukubwa.