Although many people are not happy with the results of Kenya’s presidential elections, it is important that Kenyans realise the need to move on as one country. Kenya still remains a largely poor, sick and ignorant country and this calls for an urgent focus on development issues as opposed to perennial politicking.
Clearly the election results did not represent the wishes of the Kenyan people but the fact of the matter is that president Kibaki is the constitutionally recognised leader of the Republic of Kenya. The opposition however, have a right to and indeed ought to seek redress in the courts or even vote the government out of power in parliament through a motion of no confidence.
My insistence is that everything should be done in a lawful manner in order to enable a return to normalcy in the coming year.
If we trusted that the legal process in Kenya was just, then we could hope that the election problems could be resolved in the courts. But the fact that the Chief Justice and The Attorney General were present at the swearing in is testament to the fact that the government has all the advantage.
Yes, a legal redress in lawfull and constitutionally acceptable. But let me remind you, why do you seek a legal redress in the first place? its because it povides an assurance that the matter will be justly resolved and the party seeking redress will have its case heard. But what happens in Kenya, that the government didnt bother to make it known is that during the 1992 elections which i still believe Kenneth Matiba won then he was rigged out by the then incumbment, is that, Kenneth decided to seek a legal redress ..as all of you are saying, but the case was heard almost 5years later,when it was later postponed to give way to the then elections, five years later. I will maintain that a legal redress should ideally be the channel to follow, but not in Kenya where the Executive and the Judiciary are ideally one and the same thing.