From Today's Observations,NASA will no doubt lose this petition some of the reasons being:
1] LACK OF FOCUS - Raila’s lawyers lost focus from the very beginning. They tried to prosecute 28 issues in 5 hours - a practical impossibilty. This not only confused the court, it also confused NASA lawyers. This was evident even among some of its most skilled lawyers, including its lead counsel.
2] NO TALLYING DONE - Raila’s lawyers They did not present any numbers - NASA lawyers made the deliberate mistake of not presenting their own tally. This essentially meant that they were expecting the Supreme Court judges to re-tally 41,000 form 34As, something no court would do.
3] ICT VS VOTE COUNTS - Raila’s lawyers relied too heavily on the ICT angle. The ICT issues the lawyers raised were more complex & difficult even for them to understand, let alone argue. Furthermore, ICT was ONLY relevant in the transmission of vote counts. That is, ICT came into play AFTER vote counts had been determined, and NOT BEFORE.
4] PROCESS ISSUES VS DECLARED RESULTS - Raila’s lawyers spent too much time on process issues, i.e. administrative errors. Furthermore, they failed to show what impact these issues or any of their allegations had on the declared results (form 34C).
5] DISTRACTING INNUENDO - Raila’s lawyers spent far too much time taking the court through matters of law, and even Kenyan electoral history. His lawyers failed to appreciated that this information, while highly sensational, was not entirely relevant. In distracting the Judges, Raila’s lawyers severely undermined a case what was already quite weak.
1] LACK OF FOCUS - Raila’s lawyers lost focus from the very beginning. They tried to prosecute 28 issues in 5 hours - a practical impossibilty. This not only confused the court, it also confused NASA lawyers. This was evident even among some of its most skilled lawyers, including its lead counsel.
2] NO TALLYING DONE - Raila’s lawyers They did not present any numbers - NASA lawyers made the deliberate mistake of not presenting their own tally. This essentially meant that they were expecting the Supreme Court judges to re-tally 41,000 form 34As, something no court would do.
3] ICT VS VOTE COUNTS - Raila’s lawyers relied too heavily on the ICT angle. The ICT issues the lawyers raised were more complex & difficult even for them to understand, let alone argue. Furthermore, ICT was ONLY relevant in the transmission of vote counts. That is, ICT came into play AFTER vote counts had been determined, and NOT BEFORE.
4] PROCESS ISSUES VS DECLARED RESULTS - Raila’s lawyers spent too much time on process issues, i.e. administrative errors. Furthermore, they failed to show what impact these issues or any of their allegations had on the declared results (form 34C).
5] DISTRACTING INNUENDO - Raila’s lawyers spent far too much time taking the court through matters of law, and even Kenyan electoral history. His lawyers failed to appreciated that this information, while highly sensational, was not entirely relevant. In distracting the Judges, Raila’s lawyers severely undermined a case what was already quite weak.
