BY SAM ALFAN.
Besieged electoral body commissioner Irene Masit has questioned whether a Tribunal appointed to probe her will have the courage to clear of any wrongdoing.
Making her final submissions through lawyer Donald Kipkorir, Masit asked the Tribunal whether they will be courageous to absolve her over accusations that she was among commissioners who intended to bungle last August elections.
“Would be courageous to set commissioner Irene Masit free or would you rather join the pharisees and cast stones at her?” Lawyer Kipkorir posed.
Lawyer Kipkorir further told the Tribunal that the evidence present and the tone and tenor of the Tribunal demonstrates political bias and intervention to settle political scores rather than upholding the constitution.
He submitted that the allegations against Masit were not proven at all.
The lawyer told the Justice Aggrey Muchelule Tribunal that there is not chain of custody from when Parliamentary committee made it recommendations forwarding to to the full house , the full house recommendations, forwarding to the president and the president to the Tribunal.
“There is no evidence whatsoever of the transmittal of House finding to the president and the president to the Tribunal in compliance with the constitution and the standing orders,” submitted lawyer Kipkorir.
With the conclusion of submissions, the fate of embattled IEBC Commissioner Masit now lies with the tribunal led by Judge Muchelule and members Carolyne Kamende Daudi who is the vice-chairperson, Linda Gakii Kiome, Mathew Njaramba Nyabena and Col. (Rtd.) Saeed Khamis Saeed.
Kipkorir used bible verses as he tried to sway the tribunal in his client’s favor, who remained unmoved by the pressure to resign.
“We will retire as Members of this Tribunal to consider the evidence that was before us, consider the submissions, consider the law and consider the constitution and find out what kind of recommendation we will give to the appointing authority in relation to the task that was given to us through the appointment,” said Justice Muchelule.
The Judge noted that there had been criticisms, including being asked to deal with their conscience in the matter and they shall consider every criticism to enrich the process.
“Chairman, in the book of Matthew 7:26-27 our Lord Jesus says, a foolish man builds his house on sand, when the rains and winds come it is swept away. The entire case before you my Lord is built on sand,” he said.
“This tribunal has made certain fundamental errors led by its lead counsel…One of them is that this tribunal has mixed up the mandate of being prosecutorial rather than adversarial ,” said Kipkorir.
While highlighting his submissions, Kipkorir claimed that the lead counsel stepped into the shoes and the body of the tribunal instead of being separate and apart from the tribunal.
“Another mistake or error by this tribunal is owning the witnesses as your own, the witnesses belong to the prosecution… the lead counsel also erred in summoning only inculpatory witnesses,” claimed Kipkorir.
He further faulted the tribunal for failing to give a chance to the people adversely mentioned by the tribunal.
Kipkorir noted that that accusation against Commissioner Irene Masit and the other three former Commissioners was that they tried to subvert last year’s presidential polls
He argued that how election results are declared is settled in Article 138 of the constitution Section 39 of the Elections Act and The Gazette notice published by IEBC
Kipkorir argued that there was no evidence produced to show Masit’s culpability and gross misconduct in the Presidential Elections.
Tribunal’s lead counsel Peter Munge also turned to the bible while trying to convince the tribunal to find that Masit was not suitable to be a commissioner and recommend her removal from office.
Munge claimed that the 11 witnesses called to testify before the tribunal had laid facts of breach of law by the embattled commissioner.
“I quote numbers 32.23…Which says be sure your sins will find you out. In this case Commissioner Irene Masit has since been found out by her colleagues; the Chairperson and two commissioners…she opted not to challenge that…we submit the proper recommendation is for her removal… She is not fit at all to be a commissioner of an Independent Commission,” Munge argued.
Munge argued that the evidence of bribery, trying to force a run-off by moderating results was never challenged by Masit during the entire process of hearing the case.
