21 March 2011 Moshi A poll petition in which defeated CCM candidate Justin Salakana is challenging the election of Moshi Urban legislator Philemon Ndesamburo (Chadema) has hit a snag after the respondents declared that the said petition was bad in law as it contravened some sections in the Election Act. Sources from the High Court have it that the State Attorney from the Attorney General's chamber in Moshi, Ms Stella Kachenje, representing the second respondent, the Attorney General, told Justice Stella Mugasha on a March 7 that the petition was bad in law allegedly for contravening Section III (2)(3) cap 343 of the law and therefore it should be struck out. The first respondent, Mr Ndesamburo, through his lawyer Albert Msando submitted in January this year that the petition be struck out or dismissed because the petitioner had failed to deposit Sh5 million, the statutory security for costs, for each respondent Part of Section 111 (7) of the Act says; "In the event of security of costs not being paid to the court within 14 days from the date of determination by the court of the amount payable as security for costs, no further proceedings shall be heard on the petition." According to court records, the petitioner has not yet made an application for the court to determine the amount of money he was initially prepared to deposit as security for costs and that the 14-day mandatory period to deposit the money has long elapsed as the petition was filed on November 30, last year. In his reply to the petition filed on January 1, this year, Mr Ndesamburo denied that he carried out discriminatory campaigns as alleged by the petitioner and says he did not utter any discriminatory remarks against the petitioner. Mr Ndesamburo asserts that neither his agents nor himself made any promises or conducted themselves and made acts calculated to corrupt voters and that he or his agents did not provide food or money to the electorate in the polling stations so as to persuade them to vote for Chadema as alleged by the petitioner. Replying on behalf of the second respondent, the Attorney General, Senior State Attorney, Ms Veritas Mlay, stated that allegations in paragraph 6 (a) and (b) in respect to discrimination and humiliation are baseless and with no proof, adding that annextures P3 collectively were mere pieces of newspapers with no legal base to rely on. She maintained that the petition be dismissed in its entirety and a declaration that the election of the Member of Parliament for Moshi Urban constituency was proper and that the successful candidate was properly elected.