Kibaki amerudi Ikulu

[Kitila Mkumbo]

Mkuu Kitila, hakuna anayeshangilia wizi wa kura, isipokuwa majuzi tu huyu Kibaki, alikua akishangiliwa kama shujaa wa mageuzi, sasa leo kabadilika tena, sisi hatuwezi kwenda kaa bendera tuuu, binafsi nina wasi wasi na system nzima ya Kenya na hizi chaguzi kuwa hazina ukweli, ninahitaji facts zaidi kuwaelewa hawa maaana wananichanganya!

Ngoja kwanza mkuu, yaani sisi hapa ni kwamba ni principle, kwa hiyo kama Kibaki ali-champion mageuzi na kama leo amebadilika kubaka mfumo na principles zilizotufanya tumuunge mkono lazima tumkome nyani gladi. Kwa maneno mengine hapa hapendwi mtu, ni principle tu. Ndio kusema hata shujaa wetu Zitto akitugeuka kesho akaanza kuleta za kuleta tutamkoma nyani gladi hapahapa mkuu, tena wewe ndio umetufundisha huu msemo.

 

[MzalendoHalisi]

Kitila Mkumbo,

Kibaki 2002 tulishangalia sana- kama mkombozi- je kwa nini 2002 hakuonekana mwizi? Chiluba 1991 tulishangilia tu sana!

Kuna tatizo na democracy in general in Africa- imetumika kulinda the elites (both in Afrika and West) and those in power- siku zote nasema we need a different form of democracy- ktkk ya Wachina na West!

Institutions zote za haki ni za West- sasa hata Raila akienda Mahakamani- anaweza ashishinde- this is weakness of institutions we have 'copied and pasted' - so it could be taabu iko ktk institutions za haki- which are weak and in Africa are currently evolving!

 

[Mwafrika]

On December 8, 2000, the Supreme Court of Florida ordered that the Circuit Court of Leon County tabulate by hand 9,000 ballots in Miami-Dade County. It also ordered the inclusion in the certified vote totals of 215 votes identified in Palm Beach County and 168 votes identified in Miami-Dade County for Vice President Albert Gore, Jr., and Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democratic Candidates for President and Vice President. The Supreme Court noted that petitioner, Governor George W. Bush asserted that the net gain for Vice President Gore in Palm Beach County was 176 votes, and directed the Circuit Court to resolve that dispute on remand. ___ So. 2d, at ___ (slip op., at 4, n. 6). The court further held that relief would require manual recounts in all Florida counties where so-called "undervotes" had not been subject to manual tabulation. The court ordered all manual recounts to begin at once. Governor Bush and Richard Cheney, Republican Candidates for the Presidency and Vice Presidency, filed an emergency application for a stay of this mandate. On December 9, we granted the application, treated the application as a petition for a writ of certiorari, and granted certiorari. Post, p. ___.

The proceedings leading to the present controversy are discussed in some detail in our opinion in Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd., ante, p. ____ (per curiam) (Bush I). On November 8, 2000, the day following the Presidential election, the Florida Division of Elections reported that petitioner, Governor Bush, had received 2,909,135 votes, and respondent, Vice President Gore, had received 2,907,351 votes, a margin of 1,784 for Governor Bush. Because Governor Bush's margin of victory was less than "one-half of a percent . . . of the votes cast," an automatic machine recount was conducted under §102.141(4) of the election code, the results of which showed Governor Bush still winning the race but by a diminished margin. Vice President Gore then sought manual recounts in Volusia, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade Counties, pursuant to Florida's election protest provisions. Fla. Stat. §102.166 (2000). A dispute arose concerning the deadline for local county canvassing boards to submit their returns to the Secretary of State (Secretary). The Secretary declined to waive the November 14 deadline imposed by statute. §§102.111, 102.112. The Florida Supreme Court, however, set the deadline at November 26. We granted certiorari and vacated the Florida Supreme Court's decision, finding considerable uncertainty as to the grounds on which it was based. Bush I, ante, at ___-___ (slip. op., at 6-7). On December 11, the Florida Supreme Court issued a decision on remand reinstating that date. ___ So. 2d ___, ___ (slip op. at 30-31).

On November 26, the Florida Elections Canvassing Commission certified the results of the election and declared Governor Bush the winner of Florida's 25 electoral votes. On November 27, Vice President Gore, pursuant to Florida's contest provisions, filed a complaint in Leon County Circuit Court contesting the certification. Fla. Stat. §102.168 (2000). He sought relief pursuant to §102.168(3)(c), which provides that "[r]eceipt of a number of illegal votes or rejection of a number of legal votes sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election" shall be grounds for a contest. The Circuit Court denied relief, stating that Vice President Gore failed to meet his burden of proof. He appealed to the First District Court of Appeal, which certified the matter to the Florida Supreme Court.

Accepting jurisdiction, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. Gore v. Harris, ___ So. 2d. ____ (2000). The court held that the Circuit Court had been correct to reject Vice President Gore's challenge to the results certified in Nassau County and his challenge to the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board's determination that 3,300 ballots cast in that county were not, in the statutory phrase, "legal votes."

The Supreme Court held that Vice President Gore had satisfied his burden of proof under §102.168(3)(c) with respect to his challenge to Miami-Dade County's failure to tabulate, by manual count, 9,000 ballots on which the machines had failed to detect a vote for President ("undervotes"). ___ So. 2d., at ___ (slip. op., at 22-23). Noting the closeness of the election, the Court explained that "[o]n this record, there can be no question that there are legal votes within the 9,000 uncounted votes sufficient to place the results of this election in doubt." Id., at ___ (slip. op., at 35). A "legal vote," as determined by the Supreme Court, is "one in which there is a ‘clear indication of the intent of the voter. ' " Id., at ____ (slip op., at 25). The court therefore ordered a hand recount of the 9,000 ballots in Miami-Dade County. Observing that the contest provisions vest broad discretion in the circuit judge to "provide any relief appropriate under such circumstances," Fla. Stat. §102.168(8) (2000), the Supreme Court further held that the Circuit Court could order "the Supervisor of Elections and the Canvassing Boards, as well as the necessary public officials, in all counties that have not conducted a manual recount or tabulation of the undervotes … to do so forthwith, said tabulation to take place in the individual counties where the ballots are located." ____ So. 2d, at ____ (slip. op., at 38).

The Supreme Court also determined that both Palm Beach County and Miami-Dade County, in their earlier manual recounts, had identified a net gain of 215 and 168 legal votes for Vice President Gore. Id., at ___ (slip. op., at 33-34). Rejecting the Circuit Court's conclusion that Palm Beach County lacked the authority to include the 215 net votes submitted past the November 26 deadline, the Supreme Court explained that the deadline was not intended to exclude votes identified after that date through ongoing manual recounts. As to Miami-Dade County, the Court concluded that although the 168 votes identified were the result of a partial recount, they were "legal votes [that] could change the outcome of the election." Id., at (slip op., at 34). The Supreme Court therefore directed the Circuit Court to include those totals in the certified results, subject to resolution of the actual vote total from the Miami-Dade partial recount.

The petition presents the following questions: whether the Florida Supreme Court established new standards for resolving Presidential election contests, thereby violating Art. II, §1, cl. 2, of the United States Constitution and failing to comply with 3 U.S.C. § 5 and whether the use of standardless manual recounts violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. With respect to the equal protection question, we find a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

II

A

The closeness of this election, and the multitude of legal challenges which have followed in its wake, have brought into sharp focus a common, if heretofore unnoticed, phenomenon. Nationwide statistics reveal that an estimated 2% of ballots cast do not register a vote for President for whatever reason, including deliberately choosing no candidate at all or some voter error, such as voting for two candidates or insufficiently marking a ballot. See Ho, More Than 2M Ballots Uncounted, AP Online (Nov. 28, 2000); Kelley, Balloting Problems Not Rare But Only In A Very Close Election Do Mistakes And Mismarking Make A Difference, Omaha World-Herald (Nov. 15, 2000). In certifying election results, the votes eligible for inclusion in the certification are the votes meeting the properly established legal requirements.

This case has shown that punch card balloting machines can produce an unfortunate number of ballots which are not punched in a clean, complete way by the voter. After the current counting, it is likely legislative bodies nationwide will examine ways to improve the mechanisms and machinery for voting.

B

The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College. U.S. Const., Art. II, §1. This is the source for the statement in McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 35 (1892), that the State legislature's power to select the manner for appointing electors is plenary; it may, if it so chooses, select the electors itself, which indeed was the manner used by State legislatures in several States for many years after the Framing of our Constitution. Id., at 28-33. History has now favored the voter, and in each of the several States the citizens themselves vote for Presidential electors. When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter. The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors. See id., at 35 ("[T]here is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated") (quoting S. Rep. No. 395, 43d Cong., 1st Sess.).

The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another. See, e.g., Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U.S. 663, 665 (1966) ("[O]nce the franchise is granted to the electorate, lines may not be drawn which are inconsistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment"). It must be remembered that "the right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen's vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise." Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 555 (1964).

There is no difference between the two sides of the present controversy on these basic propositions. Respondents say that the very purpose of vindicating the right to vote justifies the recount procedures now at issue. The question before us, however, is whether the recount procedures the Florida Supreme Court has adopted are consistent with its obligation to avoid arbitrary and disparate treatment of the members of its electorate.

Much of the controversy seems to revolve around ballot cards designed to be perforated by a stylus but which, either through error or deliberate omission, have not been perforated with sufficient precision for a machine to count them. In some cases a piece of the card–a chad–is hanging, say by two corners. In other cases there is no separation at all, just an indentation.

The Florida Supreme Court has ordered that the intent of the voter be discerned from such ballots. For purposes of resolving the equal protection challenge, it is not necessary to decide whether the Florida Supreme Court had the authority under the legislative scheme for resolving election disputes to define what a legal vote is and to mandate a manual recount implementing that definition. The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court do not satisfy the minimum requirement for non-arbitrary treatment of voters necessary to secure the fundamental right. Florida's basic command for the count of legally cast votes is to consider the "intent of the voter." Gore v. Harris, ___ So. 2d, at ___ (slip op., at 39). This is unobjectionable as an abstract proposition and a starting principle. The problem inheres in the absence of specific standards to ensure its equal application. The formulation of uniform rules to determine intent based on these recurring circumstances is practicable and, we conclude, necessary.

The law does not refrain from searching for the intent of the actor in a multitude of circumstances; and in some cases the general command to ascertain intent is not susceptible to much further refinement. In this instance, however, the question is not whether to believe a witness but how to interpret the marks or holes or scratches on an inanimate object, a piece of cardboard or paper which, it is said, might not have registered as a vote during the machine count. The factfinder confronts a thing, not a person. The search for intent can be confined by specific rules designed to ensure uniform treatment.

The want of those rules here has led to unequal evaluation of ballots in various respects. See Gore v. Harris, ___ So. 2d, at ___ (slip op., at 51) (Wells, J., dissenting) ("Should a county canvassing board count or not count a ‘dimpled chad' where the voter is able to successfully dislodge the chad in every other contest on that ballot? Here, the county canvassing boards disagree"). As seems to have been acknowledged at oral argument, the standards for accepting or rejecting contested ballots might vary not only from county to county but indeed within a single county from one recount team to another.

The record provides some examples. A monitor in
Miami-Dade County testified at trial that he observed that three members of the county canvassing board applied different standards in defining a legal vote. 3 Tr. 497, 499 (Dec. 3, 2000). And testimony at trial also revealed that at least one county changed its evaluative standards during the counting process. Palm Beach County, for example, began the process with a 1990 guideline which precluded counting completely attached chads, switched to a rule that considered a vote to be legal if any light could be seen through a chad, changed back to the 1990 rule, and then abandoned any pretense of a per se rule, only to have a court order that the county consider dimpled chads legal. This is not a process with sufficient guarantees of equal treatment.

An early case in our one person, one vote jurisprudence arose when a State accorded arbitrary and disparate treatment to voters in its different counties. Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368 (1963). The Court found a constitutional violation. We relied on these principles in the context of the Presidential selection process in Moore v. Ogilvie, 394 U.S. 814 (1969), where we invalidated a county-based procedure that diluted the influence of citizens in larger counties in the nominating process. There we observed that "[t]he idea that one group can be granted greater voting strength than another is hostile to the one man, one vote basis of our representative government." Id., at 819.

The State Supreme Court ratified this uneven treatment. It mandated that the recount totals from two counties, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach, be included in the certified total. The court also appeared to hold sub silentio that the recount totals from Broward County, which were not completed until after the original November 14 certification by the Secretary of State, were to be considered part of the new certified vote totals even though the county certification was not contested by Vice President Gore. Yet each of the counties used varying standards to determine what was a legal vote. Broward County used a more forgiving standard than Palm Beach County, and uncovered almost three times as many new votes, a result markedly disproportionate to the difference in population between the counties.

In addition, the recounts in these three counties were not limited to so-called undervotes but extended to all of the ballots. The distinction has real consequences. A manual recount of all ballots identifies not only those ballots which show no vote but also those which contain more than one, the so-called overvotes. Neither category will be counted by the machine. This is not a trivial concern. At oral argument, respondents estimated there are as many as 110,000 overvotes statewide. As a result, the citizen whose ballot was not read by a machine because he failed to vote for a candidate in a way readable by a machine may still have his vote counted in a manual recount; on the other hand, the citizen who marks two candidates in a way discernable by the machine will not have the same opportunity to have his vote count, even if a manual examination of the ballot would reveal the requisite indicia of intent. Furthermore, the citizen who marks two candidates, only one of which is discernable by the machine, will have his vote counted even though it should have been read as an invalid ballot. The State Supreme Court's inclusion of vote counts based on these variant standards exemplifies concerns with the remedial processes that were under way.

That brings the analysis to yet a further equal protection problem. The votes certified by the court included a partial total from one county, Miami-Dade. The Florida Supreme Court's decision thus gives no assurance that the recounts included in a final certification must be complete. Indeed, it is respondent's submission that it would be consistent with the rules of the recount procedures to include whatever partial counts are done by the time of final certification, and we interpret the Florida Supreme Court's decision to permit this. See ____ So. 2d, at ____, n. 21 (slip op., at 37, n. 21) (noting "practical difficulties" may control outcome of election, but certifying partial Miami-Dade total nonetheless). This accommodation no doubt results from the truncated contest period established by the Florida Supreme Court in Bush I, at respondents' own urging. The press of time does not diminish the constitutional concern. A desire for speed is not a general excuse for ignoring equal protection guarantees.

In addition to these difficulties the actual process by which the votes were to be counted under the Florida Supreme Court's decision raises further concerns. That order did not specify who would recount the ballots. The county canvassing boards were forced to pull together ad hoc teams comprised of judges from various Circuits who had no previous training in handling and interpreting ballots. Furthermore, while others were permitted to observe, they were prohibited from objecting during the recount.

The recount process, in its features here described, is inconsistent with the minimum procedures necessary to protect the fundamental right of each voter in the special instance of a statewide recount under the authority of a single state judicial officer. Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities.

The question before the Court is not whether local entities, in the exercise of their expertise, may develop different systems for implementing elections. Instead, we are presented with a situation where a state court with the power to assure uniformity has ordered a statewide recount with minimal procedural safeguards. When a court orders a statewide remedy, there must be at least some assurance that the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness are satisfied.

Given the Court's assessment that the recount process underway was probably being conducted in an unconstitutional manner, the Court stayed the order directing the recount so it could hear this case and render an expedited decision. The contest provision, as it was mandated by the State Supreme Court, is not well calculated to sustain the confidence that all citizens must have in the outcome of elections. The State has not shown that its procedures include the necessary safeguards. The problem, for instance, of the estimated 110,000 overvotes has not been addressed, although Chief Justice Wells called attention to the concern in his dissenting opinion. See ____ So. 2d, at ____, n. 26 (slip op., at 45, n. 26).

Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work. It would require not only the adoption (after opportunity for argument) of adequate statewide standards for determining what is a legal vote, and practicable procedures to implement them, but also orderly judicial review of any disputed matters that might arise. In addition, the Secretary of State has advised that the recount of only a portion of the ballots requires that the vote tabulation equipment be used to screen out undervotes, a function for which the machines were not designed. If a recount of overvotes were also required, perhaps even a second screening would be necessary. Use of the equipment for this purpose, and any new software developed for it, would have to be evaluated for accuracy by the Secretary of State, as required by Fla. Stat. §101.015 (2000).

The Supreme Court of Florida has said that the legislature intended the State's electors to "participat[e] fully in the federal electoral process," as provided in 3 U.S.C. § 5. ___ So. 2d, at ___ (slip op. at 27); see also Palm Beach Canvassing Bd. v. Harris, 2000 WL 1725434, *13 (Fla. 2000). That statute, in turn, requires that any controversy or contest that is designed to lead to a conclusive selection of electors be completed by December 12. That date is upon us, and there is no recount procedure in place under the State Supreme Court's order that comports with minimal constitutional standards. Because it is evident that any recount seeking to meet the December 12 date will be unconstitutional for the reasons we have discussed, we reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida ordering a recount to proceed.

Seven Justices of the Court agree that there are constitutional problems with the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court that demand a remedy. See post, at 6 (Souter, J., dissenting); post, at 2, 15 (Breyer, J., dissenting). The only disagreement is as to the remedy. Because the Florida Supreme Court has said that the Florida Legislature intended to obtain the safe-harbor benefits of 3 U.S.C. § 5 Justice Breyer's proposed remedy–remanding to the Florida Supreme Court for its ordering of a constitutionally proper contest until December 18-contemplates action in violation of the Florida election code, and hence could not be part of an "appropriate" order authorized by Fla. Stat. §102.168(8) (2000).

* * *

None are more conscious of the vital limits on judicial authority than are the members of this Court, and none stand more in admiration of the Constitution's design to leave the selection of the President to the people, through their legislatures, and to the political sphere. When contending parties invoke the process of the courts, however, it becomes our unsought responsibility to resolve the federal and constitutional issues the judicial system has been forced to confront.

The judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Pursuant to this Court's Rule 45.2, the Clerk is directed to issue the mandate in this case forthwith.

It is so ordered.

Sources:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html

 

[Kitila Mkumbo]

wakati pekee ambapo Rais mpya anatakiwa aapishwe mara moja ni pale inapotokea Rais aliye madarakani anapofariki au kupoteza sifa zake za kuwa rais.

Na hii ndio sababu hasa imebidi wa-declare na kumwapisha harakaharaka, huyu aliapishwa tarehe 30/12/2002 kwa hivyo urais wake ulikuwa unaishi effectively leo; maanake ingefika kesho nchi ingekuwa haina Rais na Kibaki angekuwa tena hana nguvu za kulazimisha alicholazimisha!

Pengine the best system ni Uganda. Kule ukichaguliwa unabaki president elect for 60 days ili kutoa nafasi kama kuna watu wana-appeal against your election.

 

[Mwafrika]

MKuu FMES,

nimeanza kukuwekea maamuzi ya kesi toka Cornell university maana inaoenekana unataka hata kubisha kuhusu sheria ya uchaguzi.

Anza na post yangu number 63

 

[MkamaP]

hivi maana ya kumkoma nyani gladi nini?? mie sielewi ila naunganisha sentensi kupata maana
gladi ni nini?

 

[Mwafrika]

Mkuu kwenye hili labda wewe ndio ukaangalie facts zako tena, maana Supreme Court ya US ilipoamua kumpa urais Bush mdogo, iliamua kutokana na hiki kipengele cha sheria kuwa ili kura zirudiwe kuhesabiwa either ni lazima iwe State nzima au Nchi nzima, hakuna kipengele cha sehria za Us kinachosema kuwa inaruhiswa kuhesabu kura za kitongoji au jimbo moja tu, ndio hasa iliyokuwa a case ya Gore na kutupwa na Supreme Court, ingawa ile Activist Court ya Florida, ilijaribu kupindisha sheria na kuruhusu kurudia kuhesabu kura za kitongoji kama unavyosema, ilibidi wapigwe rungu na Court ya mwisho kwenye hiyo Land,

katika hili fuata link hii uone vile unavyokosea katika hili

[media]http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/docs/florida2000/12-10_bushbrief.pdf[/media]

soma pia post yangu number 63 uone kuwa hakuna sheria inayosema kuwa recount lazima ifanyike state nzima na badala yake sheria inasema the other way around na Bush alishinda kwa kuargue the other way aroud

Kwa hiyo ni kwa sababu makabila mengine hayakuungana walio wengi wa kabila moja wakashinda wakaishia kuwa wengi na kushinda,

Makabila mengine yameungana mkuu na yakashinda ila Kibaki akaiba. Raila kapata kura toka kwa waluhya, kalenjin, wacoast na wengine kama 40 hivi. Kibaki ameiba na wala hakuna spin nyingine hapa.

sasa mkuu tatizo lako ni nini? Kwa nini siku zote unapenda kuamini kuwa wote lazima tukubali hoja zako kwa nguvu pamoja na kubadili majina mkuu hoja zako na style ni ile ile tu, kwenye hili mimi mkuu sina mtizamo wako wa kulalia kwenye mchezo mchafu tuu hata facts zingine huwezi kuziona ambazo ni muhimu pia kwa manuafaa ya uchaguzi wa huko mbele ya safari,

Unajua mkuu wewe hapa unaheshimika ila hii tabia yako ya kudai kujua majina ya watu wengi hapa umekosolewa na kina Icadon, kisura nk lakini bado unaendelea. Hii issue ya majina unaitumia sana ukiona unazidiwa. Hilo jina lingine ninalotumia ni lipi na inanisaidia nini kutumia majina mengi. Hii inakudhalilisha mzee maana kila wakati unadhani unawajua watu hapa kumbe unakosea.

wewe mwenyewe unakubali kuwa makabiala mengine kutoungan na ODM kumechangia kukosa urais kwao, pamoja na kwamba tunakubali na kufahamu kuwa mchezo mchafu umefanyika tayari, lakini pia kuna accademics facts ambazo hatuwezi kuzikataa kwa sababu tu ya mchezo mchafu,

Tafadhali usiniwekee mambo ambayo sijasema

Uchaguzi umefanyika, tena Afrika ambako haijawahi kutokea uchaguzi wa haki, sasa cha ajabu sielewi ni kipi mkuu kinachokufanya kujaribu kutukataza wengine wote tuupone huu uchaguzi unavyouona wewe tu, vipi mkuu? Maana hata hizi picha hazielezi anything, zaidi tu ya machafuko ambayo Kenya ni ya kawaida kisiasa hata Odinga angeshinda kungekuwepo na hizo picha tu.

The same talking point ya kutetea status quo

Mkuu binafsi ninayoana mazingaombwe tu, kuanzia Kibaki kuwa mpinzani akishirikiana na Odinga mpaka kuwa waziri wake, na baadaye Odinga kujitoa naye karibu na uchaguzi, KANU kujiunga naye pia Kibaki, kwa kweli kwangu haya yote ni mazingaombwe makubwa sana, ndio mana hata matokeo hayanishangazi, maaana ukifuatilia hizi complications the whole thing inakuwa a big joke!

Watu wengi wanaangalia future - kumbuka ule mfano wa Mkandara niliouweka somewhere hapo juu.

 

[Mwafrika]

Kitila Mkumbo,

Kibaki 2002 tulishangalia sana- kama mkombozi- je kwa nini 2002 hakuonekana mwizi? Chiluba 1991 tulishangilia tu sana!

Wewe hauonekani kabisa kama mtu aliyeshangilia Chiluba au Kibaki maana argument zako zinaonyesha tofauti kabisa.

Kuna tatizo na democracy in general in Africa- imetumika kulinda the elites (both in Afrika and West) and those in power- siku zote nasema we need a different form of democracy- ktkk ya Wachina na West!

Institutions zote za haki ni za West- sasa hata Raila akienda Mahakamani- anaweza ashishinde- this is weakness of institutions we have 'copied and pasted' - so it could be taabu iko ktk institutions za haki- which are weak and in Africa are currently evolving!

Usihamishe lawama kwa wengine. Tatizo letu ni wanasiasa tulio nao hapa ambao ni walafi na wasiotaka kuachia madaraka hata kama wangekuwa na strong system bado mambo ni yale yale tu ya kushindwa na kuiba kura huku wakileta viroja vya kuita watu majina.

 

[Mwafrika]

By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN
NEW YORK TIMES
Published: December 30, 2007


NAIROBI, Kenya — It took all of about 15 minutes for the slums to explode on Sunday after Kenya’s president was declared the winner of a deeply flawed election.

In Nairobi, President Mwai Kibaki was sworn in shortly after election results were announced.
Thousands of young men came streaming out of Kibera, a shantytown of one million people, waving sticks, smashing shacks, burning tires and hurling stones. Soldiers poured into the streets to meet them. In other areas across the country, gangs went house to house, dragging people of certain tribes out of their homes and clubbing them to death.

“It’s war,” said Hudson Chate, a mechanic in Nairobi. “Tribal war.”

The dubious conclusion of the most fiercely-fought elections in Kenya’s history has pitched the country into chaos. Western observers said that Kenya’s election commission ignored clear evidence of vote rigging to keep the government in power.

Now, one of the most developed, stable nations in Africa, which has a powerhouse economy and some of the most spectacular game parks in the world, is the scene of tribal bloodletting. With the president, Mwai Kibaki, a Kikuyu, and the lead opposition figure Raila Odinga, a Luo, the election seems to have tapped into an atavistic vein of tribal tension that always lay beneath the surface in Kenya but up until now had not provoked widespread mayhem.

In Mathare, a slum in Nairobi, Luo gangs torched more than 100 Kikuyu homes. In Kibera, Kikuyu families loaded up their things in taxis and fled. Almost all the businesses in the country are shut. The only figures in downtown Nairobi, which is usually choked with traffic, are helmeted soldiers hunched behind plastic shields. Oily black clouds of smoke rose from the slums on Sunday evening and smudged out the sun.

As the riots spread, the government issued an order outlawing live media broadcasts.

“It’s a sad day for Kenya,” said Michael E. Ranneberger, the American ambassador to Kenya. “My biggest worry now is violence, which, let’s be honest, will be along tribal lines.”

Mr. Odinga’s supporters are unleashing their frustrations about the election, which was held on Thursday and initially praised as fair, against people they suspect supported the president, namely Kikuyus. The Odinga camp urged election officials to re-tally votes after exposing serious discrepancies between the votes initially announced on the day after the election versus the numbers that were then later entered into a national tally. Everyone predicted this election would be close and the final results had Mr. Kibaki winning by a sliver, 46 to 44 percent. But that gap may have included thousands of invalid votes. The European Union said its observers in one constituency last week witnessed election officials announce that President Kibaki had won 50,145 votes, but on Sunday the election commission boosted those same results to 75,261 votes.

“The election commission has not succeeded in establishing the credibility of the tallying process,” said Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, the chief European observer.

One Western ambassador said that Western diplomats tried for hours on Sunday to persuade the election commission to do a re-tally of the vote figures using original results but that the commission refused.

“This was rigged,” the ambassador said.

The election commission acknowledged that there were irregularities but said that it was not their job to address them.

The opposition, said the chairman, Samuel Kivuitu, “can go to the courts.”

The opposition has not indicated whether it would contest the results in Kenya’s courts, which are notoriously slow and corrupt. But it said it would have a swearing-in ceremony for Mr. Odinga on Monday and declare him the “people’s president.”

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/africa/30cnd-kenya.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

_________________________________________

Hii ni nyingine toka kwa Kenyan-Tanzania

 

[Kitila Mkumbo]

Kitila Mkumbo,

Kibaki 2002 tulishangalia sana- kama mkombozi- je kwa nini 2002 hakuonekana mwizi? Chiluba 1991 tulishangilia tu sana!


Kuna tatizo na democracy in general in Africa- imetumika kulinda the elites (both in Afrika and West) and those in power- siku zote nasema we need a different form of democracy- ktkk ya Wachina na West!

Institutions zote za haki ni za West- sasa hata Raila akienda Mahakamani- anaweza ashishinde- this is weakness of institutions we have 'copied and pasted' - so it could be taabu iko ktk institutions za haki- which are weak and in Africa are currently evolving!

i)Soma jibu langu kwenye post niliyom-quote FMES

ii)Whatever form of government we adopt, the key is this, people's will and decision have to be respected. Pale ambapo matokeo yataibwa kutazuka fujo tu! Hakuna shortcut zaidi ya kuheshimu maamuzi ya watu.

 

[Kitila Mkumbo]

Kwa kweli haya yaliyotokea yameiharibu Africa. Sasa kila kiongozi aliopo madarakani watakuwa na kila sababu ya kuiba uchaguzi. Tena sasa hivi M7 na mwenzake Mugabe watakuwa wanacheka sana, wanajua sasa wameongeza member katika club yao ya kuchezea sanduku la kura chini ya ukurugenzi mahiri katika hili CCM.

 

[Icadon]

Inadhiirisha kuwa kweli madaraka matamu, miaka 5 iliyopita huyu Kibaki alikuwa mpinzani leo hataki kukubali kushindwa, watu wa namna hii ndio wanawakatisha tamaa wapiga kura wengine wanaishia kuchagua vyama tawala kila chaguzi zinapofika. Changamoto kwa wapinzani wa nyumbani.

 

[Kwaminchi]

La kutafakari hapa nini raia wafanye, baada ya mtu wasiemtaka kujisimika katika uongozi wa nchi bila ya ridhaa yao? Sishauri watu waingie msituni. Kwani hatua kama hiyo, inaweza kuwa moto juu ya moto na matokeo yake hayamsaidii yeyote katika jamii. Na kukaa kimya bila kufanya kitu cha kuukomesha mchezo huu, ndio dhambi kubwa kabisa isiyoweza kusameheka. Nashauri viongozi wa ODM na wafuasi wake, pamoja na wapenda haki wajiandae kupanga na kutekeleza migomo baridi (civil disobedience) mpaka Kibaki na serikali yake ishindwe kufanya kazi kabisa (total paralysis). Najua kuna maumivu mengi yatakayopatikana kutokana na hatua kama hii. Lakini, kama hakuna maumivu, hakuna faida itakayopatikana (no pain, no gain).

 

[William J. Malecela]

The question before the Court is not whether local entities, in the exercise of their expertise, may develop different systems for implementing elections. Instead, we are presented with a situation where a state court with the power to assure uniformity has ordered a statewide recount with minimal procedural safeguards. When a court orders a statewide remedy, there must be at least some assurance that the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness are satisfied.

Mkuu umesema maneno mengi sana, lakini la muhimu ni hili hapa tu kwamba sheria za Florida State, zinaruhsu kuhesabu kura lakini za Federal haziruhusu, mengine you can say as much as you want heshima yangu huezi kuipunguza wala kuiongeza na mabishano yako mkuu yasiyokuwa accademically guided, halafu mimi siwezi kuwa wewe hata siku moja, umejaribu kuupindisha mjadala wa Mama Mongella, umeshindwa tena vibaya sana, sasa unajaribu kutafuta kwa kulazimisha mabishano kwenye huu lakini kama kawaida, na siku zote ni lazima uwe na maneno ya heshiam yangu na uzito wa jina langu, maana siku zote vinakusumbua sana unaoneakana ungependa sana kuwa kama mimi, kumbe FD alikuwa right maana ndiye wa kwanza kusema hivyo kuwa kuna watu wangependa kuwa kama mimi, siku zote unaonekana kuamini kuwa huenda one day unaweza kuliharibu jina langu na hii mijadala isiyokua na kichwa wala miguu, uchaguzi ufanyike Kenya, wewe unishupalie mimi what do I have to do na Kenya? Unajaribu kusema nini kwamba Odinga akishinda na upinzani Tanzania utashinda?

Hivi sio Odinga huyu aliyewakanusha upinzani bongo pale maelezo kuwa yeye na chama chake wana mahusioan na CCM, maana wao sasa ni watwala sio wapinzani? Siku Kenya akigombea a new candidate nitaelewa lakini hawa kina Odinga, kibaki, Saitoti na the rest, hata siku moja hakuna lolote jipya!

Kama ni kesi Gore alishindwa kwa sababu Supreme Court, ilisimamisha recount ya majimbo machache ambayo Gore alijua kuwa ni democrat, Supreme walisema kama anataka recount iwe kwa State nzima, kuhusu uchaguzi wa Kenya, binafsi simuamini anyone kuanzia Odinga, mpaka Kibaki, wote ninawaona kuwa ni wasaniii watupu, not worthy of masikitiko, mpaka labda nitakapopata facts zaidi, maana sitashangaa kuwa Odinga pia amehusishwa na matokeo,

Otherwise, ninakutakia mjadala mwema ila kwa sasa inabidi nikuachie ushindi, kuhusiana majina mengi hata siku moja sijawahi kukosea wewe niwekee tu nitakutajia nani ni nani yaani wale wote wanaotumia majina mengi kuharibu mijadala, it is a shame act, lakini for some reason ni tabia iliyokubaliwa hapa forum, lakini sijawahi kukosea mkuu,

Uchaguzi umefanyika Kenya, hauhusiani kwa lolote na Tanzania mpaka kuanza kupigizana makelele, Kenya ni Kenya na siasa za ukabila, Tanzania hatuna hizo siasa, isipokuwa tuna wananchi wsioelewa siasa yao na sheria zao.

Good night mkuu!

 

[Mwafrika]

Mkuu umesema maneno mengi sana, lakini la muhimu ni hili hapa tu kwamba sheria za Florida State, zinaruhsu kuhesabu kura lakini za Federal haziruhusu, mengine you can say as much as you want heshima yangu huezi kuipunguza wala kuiongeza na mabishano yako mkuu yasiyokuwa accademically guided,

Mkuu inaonekana umeanza kashfa so kwa hiyo ngoja nikuache upate upper hand mkuu. ulichosema kuhusu Florida unakijua na kama ukisoma sheria utaona ukweli. So ngoja niache wasomaji waaamue

halafu mimi siwezi kuwa wewe hata siku moja, umejaribu kuupindisha mjadala wa Mama Mongella, umeshindwa tena vibaya sana, sasa unajaribu kutafuta kwa kulazimisha mabishano kwenye huu lakini kama kawaida, na siku zote ni lazima uwe na maneno ya heshiam yangu na uzito wa jina langu, maana siku zote vinakusumbua sana unaoneakana ungependa sana kuwa kama mimi,

Kama wewe unahitaji mambo ya kushinda au kushindwa basi endelea mkuu maana mimi uko sipo kabisa. Ukijaribu kunitafutia majina na kudhani kuwa mimi nataka ushindani nawe utakuwa unakosea kabisaa.
Sijali kabisa majina ya watu hapa na hujaona nikijaribu kutafuta nani ni nani hapa kama wewe. Endelea na sifa zako na ushindani wako kwani mimi siko huko kabisaaa.

kumbe FD alikuwa right maana ndiye wa kwanza kusema hivyo kuwa kuna watu wangependa kuwa kama mimi, siku zote unaonekana kuamini kuwa huenda one day unaweza kuliharibu jina langu na hii mijadala isiyokua na kichwa wala miguu, uchaguzi ufanyike Kenya, wewe unishupalie mimi what do I have to do na Kenya? Unajaribu kusema nini kwamba Odinga akishinda na upinzani Tanzania utashinda?

Mkuu heshima yako hapa forum ni kubwa sana na wala usiwe na paranoid kuwa kuna watu wanataka kukuharibia sifa hapa. Watu wanajali issues tu na ukiangalia nilichofanya hapa ni kukusahihisha tu pale ulipokuwa unakosea kama ambavyo wewe huwa unasahihisha watu kwenye thread za malecela au za mambo ya nje na husikii wakisema kuwa wewe unataka kuwaharibu majina yao binafsi.

Hivi sio Odinga huyu aliyewakanusha upinzani bongo pale maelezo kuwa yeye na chama chake wana mahusioan na CCM, maana wao sasa ni watwala sio wapinzani? Siku Kenya akigombea a new candidate nitaelewa lakini hawa kina Odinga, kibaki, Saitoti na the rest, hata siku moja hakuna lolote jipya!

Haya ni ya kwako na mpaka pale utakapoleta evidence kwenye hili utaonekana unabluff tu mkuu.

Kama ni kesi Gore alishindwa kwa sababu Supreme Court, ilisimamisha recount ya majimbo machache ambayo Gore alijua kuwa ni democrat, Supreme walisema kama anataka recount iwe kwa State nzima, kuhusu uchaguzi wa Kenya, binafsi simuamini anyone kuanzia Odinga, mpaka Kibaki, wote ninawaona kuwa ni wasaniii watupu, not worthy of masikitiko, mpaka labda nitakapopata facts zaidi, maana sitashangaa kuwa Odinga pia amehusishwa na matokeo,

Ukinionesha sehemu yoyote niliyokulazimisha uamini kile ambacho ninachoamini basi nitakuomba msamaha hapa forum. Soma tu kesi ya Gore na facts za Kenya ili next time uwe na facts zote.

Otherwise, ninakutakia mjadala mwema ila kwa sasa inabidi nikuachie ushindi, kuhusiana majina mengi hata siku moja sijawahi kukosea wewe niwekee tu nitakutajia nani ni nani yaani wale wote wanaotumia majina mengi kuharibu mijadala, it is a shame act, lakini for some reason ni tabia iliyokubaliwa hapa forum, lakini sijawahi kukosea mkuu,

Uchaguzi umefanyika Kenya, hauhusiani kwa lolote na Tanzania mpaka kuanza kupigizana makelele, Kenya ni Kenya na siasa za ukabila, Tanzania hatuna hizo siasa, isipokuwa tuna wananchi wsioelewa siasa yao na sheria zao.

Good night mkuu!

FMES, mimi sikujui wewe ni nani na wala sitaki nikufahamu. Nina hakika kuwa wewe hunifahamu na watu wengi hapa huwafahamu maana huwa unakosea mara kwa mara. Kuzani kuwa mimi ni fulani hapa ni makosa maana huna idea kabisa of the guy behind this computer.

Heshima kwako zaidi mkuu ila nakuhakikishia kuwa sina mpango wa kukushinda wewe maana una jina kubwa hapa JF. Nimekusahihisha tu kwa yale uliyokosea kama ilivyokawaida ya JF. Pole kwa misundestandings ila nakuhakikishia kuwa umekosea sana kudhani kuwa mimi natumia hayo majina mengine.

 

[William J. Malecela]

According to the dataz ambazo nimezipata few minutes ago, ila sijui how good au bad they are, lakini nitawachia wananchi waamue,

Odinga, alikuwa warned mapema na wanaofahamu zaidi siasa za Kenya, kwamba kusingekluwa na uwezekano wa yeye kushinda akiwa Orange, badala yake aliambiwa arudi KANU na kuwavuta Mudavadi, na Kilonzo, kwa sababu aliambiwa Orange ni tawi tu la NARCO ambayo toka ishike power haikuwa na a good record zaidi tu ya kukimbilia Ikulu, kwa hiyo akaombwa kuwa kujiweka sawa na angalau Wakikuyu ingawa sio wote basi ajiunge na KANU, lakini akakataa kata kata, ingawa alibembelezwa sana na the powers!

Habari za huko zinasema kuwa jeshi zima la Kenya ni wa-Kikuyu, GSU ni wa-Kikuyu ndio wengi sana, na hata kama Odinga angeshinda wao wangeingia msituni, maana Mkikuyu hawezi kukubali kutawaliwa na Mjaluo, kwa kweli it very sad, lakini ndio siasa zetu Afrika, sasa what is next, nasikia Odinga amepewa warning kali sana kuwa asimamishe fujo ama sivyo, yatamkuta ya Bhutto! What a shame!

US wanasema in private, shetani wanayemjua ni Kibaki, ni better kuliko shetani wasiyemjua Odinga, it is over, huko SA nako nasikia moto unawaka, Mbeki anataka kumzima Zuma, nasikia Makaburu walishasema kuwa Zuma hawezi kuwa rais wao, lakini Mandela na Mbeki sawa, wakati Zuma yuko jela ya Makaburu, Mbeki alikuwa akizunguka tu nje, sasa anajaribu kumzima a Freedom Fighter,

Sasa nasikia the first task ya Kibaki, sasa ni kutumia anymeans necessary ili atambuliwe kwanza na sisi Tanzania, maana the rest will follow, sasa tusubiri tuone msimamo wa viongozi wetu ulipo!

Only in Afrika!

 

[Rufiji]

Haya matatizo ya Kenya ni makubwa , nashindwa kuelewa hawa wakina Zito wanaokimbilia kutaka federation ni kwa manufaa ya taifa au kuna position ambazo wameahidiwa ?

 

[William J. Malecela]

Quote:-

"nashindwa kuelewa hawa wakina Zito wanaokimbilia kutaka federation ni kwa manufaa ya taifa au kuna position ambazo wameahidiwa ?"

Mkuu Rufiji,

Heshima mbele, hebu fafanua kidogo hapa wengine hatujakuelewa vizuri?

 

[Kichuguu]

Unfortunately hiyo ni sehemu ya miscarriage of justice. Ilitokea Marekani mwaka 2000 na 2004 kiasi kuwa imechukua miaka minane kuachana na kiongozi aliyeingia madarakani kwa wizi wa kura. Zawadi iliyotokana na kiongozi wa namna hiyo ni kuongozwa na "the worst President in American History," worse that Taft, na kuiacha nchi ikiwa almost muflisi.

Kibaki ajiandae kuona image yake aliyojenga miaka mitano iliyopita inafutika kabisa, na vile vile ajiandae kuiona Kenya ikiharibika kiasi kuwa hata yale makampuni multinationals yaliyokwisha jijenga pale yataanza kukimbilia Tanzania au Uganda: Kufa Kufaana.

 

[Lunyungu]

Habari na salaam toka Kiserian Kenya . Afrika Mashariki imeingizwa katika mgogoro mkubwa sana .Kulazimisha kwa Kibaki kuwa Ikulu kunaleta shida kubwa sana Kenya . Tanzania sijajua JK kaupokea vipi huu ushindi wa Kibaki lakini Kenya sim shwari. Natembea na Passport yangu nje na nina polisi 2 wa Kenya maana hali si tulivu.Wamevaa kiraia na silaha ili kupata habari kidogo kidogo .Hali ni tenge na kila mtu ni muoga hapa .Nitawapa zaidi maana nategemea kujivuta kuingia Jiji senta kabisa baadaye leo .