- Ahmednasir said the CJ could at least direct the Registrar of the Supreme Court to highlight parts where the Apex Court addressed the server issue.
- He equated the situation to that of Brazil where former President Jair Bolsorano's challenge on election results were rejected by the electoral court.
Image: FILE
Lawyer Ahmednasir Abdullahi now says that Chief Justice Martha Koome can help opposition leader Raila Odinga with his opening server demand.
In a statement on Tuesday, Ahmednasir said the Chief Justice could at least direct the Registrar of the Supreme Court to highlight parts where the Apex Court addressed the server issue in their judgement.
He equated the situation to that of Brazil where former President Jair Bolsorano's challenge on election results was rejected by the electoral court and his party was fined about $5 million.
The lawyer, however, said Koome cannot do the same as the Supreme Court in Brazil.
"When former Brazilian President Bolsorano disputed the election result and the decision of the Supreme Court, the Court summoned and fined him $5 million. Raila is raising the need to open the server," he said.
"I know CJ Koome doesn't have the Gravitas, nor the esteem of the Brazilian Supreme Court, but at least she can order the Registrar of the Supreme Court to highlight the paragraphs in the judgment of the Court that addresses the server and the processes and procedures that informed it."
One of the key demands by the Opposition amid planned protests is to have the IEBC servers opened for an audit.
The Raila Odinga-led side claims to have won the August 2022 presidential election by over 8 million votes, but the election was rigged in favour of President William Ruto.
In their election petition, the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision read by Chief Justice Martha Koome said Raila and six other petitioners raised grave allegations that affected the tabulation of election results but the irregularities were not sufficient to alter the outcome of the election.
On the controversy that surrounded the disparities in Forms 34A that were uploaded on the public portal and those that were delivered physically at the Bomas of Kenya, the court found that the disparities were insignificant and could not warrant the nullification of an election.
"No credible evidence was to support the allegation that Forms 34A presented to agents differed from those uploaded on the public portal," Koome said adding that," the court ruled.
An ICT scrutiny report said that the transmission logs produced in the affidavit of Justus Nyang’aya were of no probative value.