IEBC chiefs set to spill beans before tribunal

The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) Chairman Wafula Chebukati and two other commissioners are expected to spill the beans against their four colleagues who are facing investigations over their conduct during the August General Election.

Tribunal formed by President William Ruto to probe the ‘Cherera Four’ kicked off hearing of four petitions filed against the quartet yesterday with the first witness, Rev Dennis Nthumbi, taking the stand.

Tribunal’s lead Counsel Peter Munge said he intends to call Chebukati, commissioners Boya Molu and Abdi Guliye as witnesses in the matter.

He sought summons to be issued against the management of Serena Hotel and Yaya Apartments to produce some of the documents and video they intend to rely on against the commissioners.

Nthumi produced before the tribunal, parts of an affidavit that Chebukati, Guliye and Molu signed during the presidential petition.

Commissioners had revealed how the National Security Advisory Committee warned Chebukati not to declare William Ruto as the President-Elect during the presidential petition.

In an affidavit by Guliye, he claimed that the security committee was led by Principal Administrative Secretary at the Office of President Kennedy Kihara, Solicitor General Kennedy Ogeto, former Inspector General of Police Hillary Mutyambai and Vice Chief of Defence Forces Lieutenant General Francis Ogolla.

The commissioners had alleged that the then Attorney General Paul Kihara had relayed their message that if the commission declared Ruto as President-Elect ‘the country is going to burn’.

According to Guliye, Kihara proceeded to indicate that skirmishes between the Kikuyu and Luo communities had already started in several slums including Kibera and Mathare on the basis of alleged betrayal by the Kikuyus.

Yesterday, Nthumbi produced the affidavits as evidence before the tribunal.

Embattled commissioner Irene Masit, the last one left standing, tried to stop the proceedings against her before the tribunal to no avail.

Through lawyer Donald Kipkorir, Masit, who was not present physically, had argued that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter.

“The evidence against my client obtained from Yaya Apartments was illegally obtained. It will be dangerous for this tribunal to admit evidence that was illegally obtained,” Kipkorir argued.

Security expert

However, the tribunal, chaired by Justice Aggrey Muchelule, dismissed the objections and directed the hearing to proceed.

Nthumbi, who is one of the petitioners, asked the tribunal to certify that the petition raises constitutional grounds for removal of Masit.

“Upon making a finding for removal, the tribunal should recommend for possible criminal proceedings of Masit and the other three commissioners who resigned,” Nthumbi claimed.

Nthumbi, who identified himself as a security expert, narrated to the tribunal the chronology of events that happened at Bomas on August 15 when Chebukati announced the presidential results.

The petitioner tabled before the tribunal video evidence of the chaos at the Bomas and the press conference of the Cherera Four at Serena.

Masit through her lawyer, tried to object to the video being played, claiming no proper legal foundation had been laid by the petitioner for it to be played to court.

Tribunal, however, dismissed the objection and directed the video to be played.

Besides Muchelule, members of the tribunal comprise Carolyne Daudi, Linda Kiome, Mathew Nyabena and retired Colonel Saeed Khamis.

“All of us were in utter shock with the presser…violence was also ensuing at the National Tallying centre…The four commissioners acted in a manner that would have caused genocide in the country,” Nthumbi said.

During cross-examination, Kipkorir asked the tribunal to find Nthumbi as a fraudster, whose testimony was not credible.

He claimed that the petitioner did not have a degree in security matters despite claiming that he was a security expert.

He added that the affidavits had been determined by the Supreme Court and the court did not order for any prosecution of his client.

Hearing proceeds today.