Much of the rigging took place in Central Province
When it comes to Igembe South, there was a slight difference in the manipulation process because here, Raila’s votes were reduced by 1,836 votes, that is, from 3,950 released by ECK at the constituency to 2,114 released by ECK at KICC while Kibaki’s votes were increased from 37,931 released by ECK at the constituency to 60,010, released by the Electoral body at KICC thereby adding an extra 22,079 votes to Kibaki. It looked like a case of robbing Raila to pay for Kibaki victory. As was the procedure, returning officers refused to avail Form 16A to ODM agents as required by law. (417) It is difficult to understand why the Kriegler Commission claimed that the results were so warped up that it was impossible to tell who had won the Presidential vote. Statistics being presented here are ECK statistics that existed on paper and that were announced publicly, some in the presence of ODM agents and observers. Did the Kriegler Commission also examine statistics on video tapes presented by ECK Commissioners at KICC live on TV channels if they could not make out the mathematics on what was on paper? Were these tapes also jumbled?
That brings us to Mwea, which was another unique case that may serve to broaden understanding of the rigging process that plunged Kenya into crisis. In this Constituency, Kibaki got 59,10 4(418) votes but ECK officials at KICC gave him 62,374 (419) votes. What makes this case unique is not the number of votes that were added to Kibaki’s because they were few compared to other thefts. The original results in which Kibaki got 59,104 votes was submitted by John B. Irungu (ID 9553811) and the results were received by Agnes Kisero on December 28, 2007, at 10.00 AM. (420) In the form, it is only results of Kibaki that had been altered by hand from 59,104 to 62,374 and this meant that the total number of votes cast and the total number of valid votes had to be changed to make it fit with the new figures that had been invented by ECK officials. When this was done, the total number of valid votes increased from 60,602 to 63,376 while the total number of votes cast also increased from 60,314 to 63,060. Although the changes in the original Form 16A were made by hand by altering the figures, Form 16A that was used for the final results, which was announced by ECK at KICC, was typed. The most unintelligent omission here was that the final form that was used to convey the fake results was unsigned, (421) pointing to carelessness that had developed among ECK officers who were in charge of the rigging apparatus. Were there too many alterations that had to be made to an extent that officials simply forgot to sign some forms after results were altered? In the same results, Raila’s votes were reduced by 237 i.e. from 550 to 313 votes. Failure to sign Form 16As that had been altered was captured by KPTJ, which reported in its December 29–30 election observer log that:
“Many constituency results were received and announced by Commissioners without the signatures of ECK officials and all party agents. Indeed, some of the documents conveying the results contained only the results without the presiding officers’ signature, ECK stamp or any agent’s signature. For example, there were no signatures and stamps in most Forms 16A, 16, and 17A from Nithi, Kitui West, Kitui South, Mwala, Kinangop, Ol Kalou, Mukurweini, Gichugu, Lari, Mathioya, Eldoret East, Mosop, Aldai, Baringo East, Baringo Central, Laikipia West, Naivasha, Nakuru, Kuresoi, Kajiado North, and Kajiado South yet the Commissioners had already announced the results from these constituencies. Some constituencies had only a few statutory forms, but their total votes were still announced. These included Ndaragwa, which had 25 Form 16As not signed by party agents”. (422)
The same report proceeded to add that in Mathira, thirty-four Form 16As were unsigned, one had a double entry while two returns for Parliamentary results were entered in the Presidential file. At the polling station, the KPTJ log says that the total Presidential tally of returns filed with Form 16A was 77,442 votes after verification by a Commissioner, ECK Deputy Secretary and observers against a figure of 80,024 that was announced by ECK at the press briefing room. The rigging process had already gathered steam and Commissioners were reportedly advising returning officers to withhold results as this would understandably give them more time to rig. This was the case of returning officers who were turned away at Thika.
“Those returning officers had reached Thika, on their way to Nairobi with results when some commissioners called and instructed them to withhold results. It is true that Kivuitu lost touch with those ROs and I suspect the commissioners who talked to them instructed them to change their numbers,” a source at the ECK said… “Because even staff were getting suspicious and also because they were not required to see the changes being made, a female commissioner took the responsibility of carrying files of altered results from the first floor to Kivuitu on the third floor…”(423)
The situation did not get better in the Lari Constituency where Raila did not get more than 266 (424) votes but where ECK officials increased his votes to 457 (425) by adding 191 votes. That was after Kibaki’s votes had been increased from 41,213 (426) to 49,276 (427) votes, thereby adding 8,063 votes. It is understandable why ECK officials refused to avail Form 16A to ODM’s Party agents because the form was altered by hand by crossing official figures that had been announced at the Constituency and replacing them with new figures. Once this was done, a new Form 16A dated December 29, 2007, was issued by ECK officials at KICC and the new figures were neatly typed in and signed by the same officer, Dr. James Kivuthia Materi, whose ID and telephone numbers also appear on the form. The difference in the two forms that can be noted is that in the original Form 16A that contained correct results announced at the constituency, Materi’s middle name of “Kivuthia” is initialized with a letter “K” while in the form where figures were altered, the name is written in full.
Another difference in the forms is that the original Form 16A that contains correct results also contains the name, ID number, time of submission and signature of Agnes Kisero, ECK official at KICC, while the fake form used to rig the results does not contain Kisero’s details. That is to say that Form 16A used for rigging is different in layout compared to the one used at the Constituency. The omission (in the fake Form 16A) of personal details of the ECK officer who received results at ECK is serious because then, it becomes unclear as to how results reached the tallying room. Nobody is accountable to this form and this anomaly repeated itself over and over again, especially in cases where results had been manipulated after they were delivered from the Constituency. To get a possible explanation as to how results could have arrived at the tallying centre without being brought there by returning officers, one does not have to look further. The KPTJ log gives a clue. It says in part:
“Results for the following constituencies were announced without some statutory documents including Forms 16A, 16 and 17A Makadara, Starehe, Likoni, Malindi, Galole, Wundanyi, Ijara, Lamu East, Voi, Dujis and Igembe South. Some results were also faxed as provisional tallies, as in Kirinyaga Central. In other cases, results were announced when there was no documentation to support the announcement, for example, Kimilili, Bumala Alego, Kitutu Masaba, Nyaribari Chache, Bomachoge and Kuria constituencies…In some cases, the returning officers’ files available at ECK’s tallying centre are in duplicate and ECK senior staff claim they cannot find the original files for scrutiny. Examples include Kieni, Ol Kalou and North Imenti. Indeed, most photocopies of Forms 16A were neither signed by the presiding officers nor by party agents, yet the results on such forms were included in the tally of results. (428)
At some point, ECK officials appeared to have been in a total hurry. At least, this was the case by 2.00 PM on Saturday December 29 2007 when results from Limuru (polling station 104) came in. As per procedure, the results were received from someone by the name of Karanga whose handwritten name appears on the Form 16A handed over to and acknowledged by Agnes Kisero whose name also appears on several Form 16A’s that were subsequently altered. The Limuru results arrived on Sunday afternoon, the same day Kibaki was sworn in, and there seemed to have been an element of haste because the results were altered on Form 16A by simply writing (by hand) new inflated results beside the official figures that were already typed in. The consequence is that the form containing the Limuru results has two figures standing side by side as follows: Party of National Unity (Kibaki) 48,384 and 40,788 with the former being the inflated results; Kukubo Nixon Jeremiah 6 and 5 (he was added one vote); Matiba Kenneth Stanley Njibo 10 and 8 votes; Musyoka Stephen Kalonzo 439 and 430; Mwangi Pius Mwiru 15 and 10 votes; Ngacha Joseph Karani 123 and 104 votes; Ngethe David Waweru, 13 and 10 votes; Odinga Raila Amolo, 2,934 and 3,144 votes (votes reduced by 210); while Rajput Nazlin Omar Fazaldin had 11 and 9 votes. The only female Presidential candidate benefited by getting two extra votes. In the same manipulation, the total votes cast was also increased through a handwritten alteration from 44,481 to 52,343 votes and valid votes cast was altered by hand from 44,078 to 51,940. The alteration officer did not forget to change the percentage of voter turnout, which was changed from 67.63 percent to 79.88 percent. What the officer forgot to change, however, was the percentage of votes registered by each Presidential candidate, which remained the same, and was based on the original figures that were clearly typed.
This “gigantic failure in rigging” could have been due to shortage of time because one needed to make fresh calculations for each and every one of the nine candidates and in case there were more figures to be altered for submission to the briefing room, there was simply no time. It is instructive to note that the altered figures are the ones that were eventually announced by ECK officials. The rigging was crude to say the least and while examining the details of this dastard exercise, one cannot fail to marvel at the crudity of the techniques. A plausible explanation could be that the officials did not envisage a situation where what they were doing could be discovered and it appears as though they were operating with the understanding that whatever was happening at KICC under the roof of the tallying centre was strictly a confidential affair that would never be known by anybody except those who were involved.
Starehe Constituency is in Nairobi and the manipulation of votes here was an indication that the rigging was extensive. The total Parliamentary votes cast at Starehe was 70,853 but to increase Kibaki’s votes with 13,599, ECK officials at KICC increased the total number of Presidential votes cast to 84,452. (429) In Kimilili, it was the same case of increasing Kibaki’s votes and doing the same for Raila. The result is that Kibaki gained 12,661 votes after an increase from 23,126 (430) to 35,787 (431) while Raila was once again lucky because he gained with 510 votes after ECK officials at KICC increased his votes from 16,804 (432) to 17,314. (433) Kaloleni is also situated in Nairobi and it was given the same treatment in the sense that the rigging involved increasing total Presidential votes with Kibaki as the beneficiary. Here, 12,491 votes were added to Kibaki after Presidential votes of 28,740 was increased to 41,231. (434) This result however, does not tally with ECK figures which gives Kibaki 16,879 votes at both the constituency level and figures announced at KICC. In Kirinyaga where Kibaki’s votes were increased by 10,353, returning officers refused to avail Form 16A to ODM agents. ECK officials at KICC increased Kibaki’s votes from 43,866 (435) to 54,219. (436) A new Form 16A dated December 29, 2007, and signed by James Gitahi (ID 10245496) was issued by ECK officials at KICC and during this manipulation, Raila gained by 13 votes after an increase from 580 to 593. The 44,446 Presidential votes cast exceeded Parliamentary votes by 10,934 votes, which went to Kibaki.
Much of the rigging took place in Central Province and Kieni was never left behind. At KICC, ECK officials altered Form 16A dated December 28, 2007, and put Kibaki ahead with 17,677 votes. This was done by altering the figures from 54,377 (437) to 72,054 (438) votes in another case in which Form 16A dated December 29, 2007, was issued by the thieving officials. A plus for Kibaki was that 67 votes were stolen from Raila and given to Kibaki. Just like in many cases, the officer who received the correct results endorsed by ODM was P.M Wanyoike (ID No. 12994403). He filed his report (439) on December 28, 2007, at 3:35 PM but when a new Form 16A was issued by ECK officials at KICC for rigging purposes, it was Bwondara Sheila (ID 22686500) who purportedly received the results on December 29, 2007, (the following day) at 6.30 AM. (440) It is this form that contained the altered results and by implication, I wish to argue that Bwondora might have been one of the ECK officials who was involved in election rigging for how else could one understand the glaring difference or explain the fact that two different Form 16As signed by different people were used to report the same results?
Another common difference in this case is that Form 16A submitted by Wanyoike, which contained the correct results, was printed on December 28, 2007, but when Bwondora “received” the results on another Form 16A issued by ECK at KICC for purposes of rigging, evidence on the form indicate that it was printed on December 29, 2007, a day before Kibaki was installed as President. In other words, these illegal forms were being printed, a day after Kivuitu had claimed that they would look much more carefully into the tallying process and after ECK had allowed Party agents to scrutinize results that had already been announced. If the Kieni vote was rigged on Sunday December 30 at 6.30 AM, is it possible that Kivuitu did not know about it? A theoretical situation that arises is that by Saturday, December 29, 2007, votes that had been rigged in favour of Kibaki could still not give him a lead thus the rigging continued even after heated exchanges between ECK officials and ODM agents at the press briefing room. Indeed, Kaikai, a KTN journalist, did announce that at the time a decision was taken by ECK that Party agents look into the results overnight, Raila was leading with just over 40,000 votes. To be continued in Part 4…
Raila Odinga’s Stolen Presidency: Pages 289-294
Excerpts from Chapter Sixteen: “How Raila Odinga’s Presidency Was Stolen”
RELATED:
About the Author
