Big Man,
I do not want to respond to the empty part of your write up.
However, if the Supreme Judges in their Supreme Judgement are giving response to the AG as a friend of Court, does the Law allow them to quote an Article that does not exist? There is no Article 138(1)(b) in the Constitution of Kenya.
If they wanted to make reference to Article 139(1)(b), they would have just done that. Our concern is that they, as learned as you guys like pretending, have made a reference to an Article that does not exist in our Constitution.
There is a very clear difference between Article 138(1)(b) and 139(1)(b). The point is, the former does not exist while the latter does. And the Learned Guys, or so we are made to believe, did make a reference to Hot Air.
Such Hot Air Judgements would make Azdak turn in his grave. Judgement when pronounced must be pronounced with absolute gravity. It is never a child's play. It never countenances error.
In this case, you are akin to a Doctor who diagnoses Cancer on the left breast then goes ahead to chop off the right breast as soon as the Patient has placed on anesthesia. That is carelessness. You cannot confuse me otherwise.
I must submit that you must never carry yourself as the only virtue of paragon online. You may want to impress in your nakedness Bro.
Oto
--- On Wed, 4/17/13, Nyamodi Ochieng Nyamogo <okil@nyamogoadvocates.com> wrote:
From: Nyamodi Ochieng Nyamogo <okil@nyamogoadvocates.com>
Subject: [Mwananchi] Re: [NewVisionKenya] Supreme Typing Error; or is it?
To: NewVisionKenya@yahoogroups.com
Cc: "mulembe" <mulembe@yahoogroups.com>, "Mwananchi" <Mwananchi@yahoogroups.com>, Mwananchi@yahoogroups.com, "MWANYAGETINGE NETWORK" <mwanyagetinge@yahoogroups.com>, naijaobserver@yahoogroups.com, "Nation" <editor@nation.co.ke>, "News" <news@1fm.co.ke>, next_kenya@yahoogroups.com, nigerianworldforum@yahoogroups.com, ntv@nation.co.ke, "NYSA" <nysa1@googlegroups.com>, "PK" <progressive-kenyans@googlegroups.com>, Siasa-Kenya@yahoogroups.com, sundaynation@nation.co.ke, talkhard@yahoogroups.com, talknigeria@yahoogroups.com, "the last word to kenya" <thelastwordtokenya@yahoogroups.com>, "The People" <peoplespeak@mediamax.co.ke>, "Vugu Vugu" <vuguvugumashinani@yahoogroups.com>, "Wanabidii" <wanabidii@googlegroups.com>, wananchi@yahoogroups.com, "Weekly Citizen" <citnewspaper@yahoo.com>, "YP" <youngprofessionals_ke@googlegroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 17, 2013, 6:28 AM
OTO,
You accuse the justices of the Supreme Court of being
"careless" for this kind of stuff?! That is the kind of aberration
that only laymen, like you, can be allowed to wallow in!
It is a hallowed dictum of legal practice that you must ALWAYS
construe a court decision in a manner that does not lead to absurdity!
Read the judgement from paragraph 286 at page 103! The justices of the
Supreme Court have clearly said that they are giving "direction"
requested by the "AG as amicus curiae, as to the meaning to be accoded
to fresh elections refered to in various Articles of the
Constitution"!
The reference to death of a President-elect and resultant need
for "fresh elections" is only found in Article 139 of the Constitution
2010! To avoid absurdity, you must therefore understand Their
Lordships of The Supreme Court to have intended to be and to have been
refering to Article 139 (1)b or, at the very worst, (3)b of The
Constitution of Kenya 2010!
Finally, this is what the legal profession knows, and
understands, as "an error apparent on the face of the record", which
can be corrected easily by the court without any dilapidating
consequence on the outcome itself!!! Do you think i owe you any thanks
for expressing such uninformed, if misinformed, prejudice towards the
Honourable Justices of The Supreme Court???!!!
Nyamodi Ochieng-Nyamogo.
On 4/17/13, odhiambo okecth <komarockswatch@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> At Page 106 of the Supreme Court Ruling, this is what they say;
>
> '[290] Suppose, however, that the candidates, or a candidate who took part
> in
> the original election, dies or abandons the electoral quest before the
> scheduled
> date: then the provisions of Article 138(1) (b) would become applicable,
> with
> fresh nominations ensuing.'
>
> Now this is the Law;
>
> Procedure at presidential elections;
> 138 (1)- If any one candidate for President is nominated, that candidate
> shall be declared elected.
> (2) if two or more candidates for President are nominated, an election shall
> be held in each constituency,
>
> Now, that is the Law. Where is 138(1)(b)? Or is it a Supreme Typing Error?
>
> Could they be making
> reference to Article 138(8)(b)? This kind of error is very consistent with
> the careless way in which the Petition was dismissed.
>
> Oto
__._,_.___ .  __,_._,___
|
--
Send Emails to wanabidii@googlegroups.com
Kujiondoa Tuma Email kwenda
wanabidii+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com Utapata Email ya kudhibitisha ukishatuma
Disclaimer:
Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wanabidii" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wanabidii+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
0 comments:
Post a Comment