The Maina Kiai ruling was made too late in the day, parliament had been closed there was no way to make alter the process to totally conform to the ruling. IEBC had only two options, let kenyans have the results asap albeit unverified or close the portal.
kuna polling stations hazikuwa na agents wa NASA but they were signed by āNASAā agents
1 Like
Kama gani?
1 Like
a system that was neither hacked nor compromised by insiders, in any case the truest test of the integrity of a process or a system is in the accuracy of its output, if the results are accurate everything else is inconsequential.
1 Like
those 10,000 polling stations whose scanned form 34As did not reach the portal were domiciled in areas lacking network coverage, that they failed to transmit by itself should not be a reason to condemn the system, in any case those places will not have 3G network on the 17th and in all likelihood transmission will fail again.
The judges should have queried the results from those places, if there were discrepancies then they would have enough grounds to condemn the results, letās wait for the ruling, it should shed more light
4 Likes
Exactly. One output of the result was the number being beemed to our screens. Was that number accurate? That is did it correspond to the input?
kenyans protecting the people that screw them over effing politiciansā¦ kumbuka these niggas are fighting for removal of the interest cap. so kama una loan lipa haraka ama you end up being another angry blackman in africa next year
2 Likes
Comfortably waiting for 17/10 to win by 70%+1 vote win and rest this matter once and for all. maraga can try nullify all elections but one think he canāt do is declare babuon winner, get him votes or stop Jubilee win again.
2 Likes
āStatisticsā is just a legally appropriate word for provisional results, since the High Court banned the latterā¦ but no matter how many times this is repeated, I donāt expect Nasa to accept it.
The results on the portal were accurate to the extent that they were manually typed by the presiding officers on the kits. But they were not final, because results are subject to change on the ground. For example, the presidential results are counted and transmitted before any other box is opened. But if a presidential ballot paper was mistakenly dropped into say, an MPs ballot box, I think (not sure) they would count it. I also heard that returning officers can make certain changes eg. on rejected votes if the intent of the voter is clear.
Bottomline is the āstatisticsā should not have a huge % difference with the final results. And unless the race is super close, the winner on the portal will not change.
Now, since Morpho has rubbished the hacking claims, Nasa algorithm allegations get thrown out of the window. IEBC staff can only update forms, figures, create accounts, but I believe only Morpho can be able to add any new piece of code/algorithm to the source code.
2 Likes
I see people havent accepted and moved on, i wonder how 17th will be like.
2 Likes
.
based on the fact that the petitioner did not dispute the input at any time and the scrutiny did not reveal any input that varied with the output (ie figures on the portal vs figures on the form 34As or those on the form 34as vs those on the 34bs) the output stands unchallenged.
NASA INFILTRATED THE THE POLLS DURING THE TALLYING. THEY INJECTED MESSED FORMS . WHICH THE SUBPRIME COURT WAS TO USE AS EVIDENCE. I highly doubt kama one of the seven judges was really sick ! ā¦one day we shall know the truth
1 Like
If they infiltrated the system, why didnt they tilt the numbers to their favor?
3 Likes
Simply coz that was not their objective.
1 Like
They knew it could not work ( it can never workā¦reality ) their intentions was to force a rerun ,through the court. ā¦this was calculated move, with SUPRIME court knowledge
Too hard to pull. Their only break was to introduce irregularitiesā¦
IMO, These judges did not seem keen enough when hearing the case. Many are the times when the lawyers made some frivolous claims and it passed the judges attention until lawyers on the opposite side interjected. What I am saying is they did not look sharp, especially the CJ
Secondly, during the run up to the elections, and in answering the many criticisms directed towards the IEBC and the commissioners, Mr. Wanyonyi kept assuring us that in the event that the systems failed, or were compromised, the polling station result (Form 34A) would be the document of reference. How this was not brought up at the supreme court escapes me.
Finally, and in reference to my second point above, the opposition were the proponents of the polling station and constituency tally. Indeed they celebrated days on end the ruling in the Maina Kiai case. How they conveniently forgot this at the time of the petition is a case study for a political science PHD thesis.
1 Like
A
As I said before one of the main reason why IEBC lost the case is IEBC lawyers and Uhurus lawyers walikuwa vichwa malenge kabisa. That is why they lost the case. All they did in the supreme court ni kutapa tapa, you remember their inability to answer justice Mwilus question of when a voter decides to cast only one vote where the other 5 will go and the fake IEBC forms.
2 Likes
Kama wamesema haikuwa hacked, wamepeana results ya winner?
Iām always keen on completeness and accuracy of any system generated information. Bila hio, hamna.
1 Like