I have defended Miguna Miguna in the past, both in print and in private – at least, it was meant to be private, until Miguna broke an undertaking of confidence and made a private communication public.

That is typical of the Miguna we have unfortunately come to know – a person with deeply worrying issues and insufficient personal morality to restrain him from selling his friends down the road, let alone to prevent his embarking on a campaign of all-consuming personal vengeance filled with hatred.

Many of us, including Raila Odinga – the object of Miguna’s poisonous wrath, have tried hard to save Miguna in the past. Ultimately, in the Prime Minister’s office, it became impossible to keep Miguna and to protect him from himself.

It is deeply sad that a man with a good brain should be tortured and destroyed by emotions he cannot control, so that he ends up a victim at the mercy of his own self-destructive inner turmoil.

Other responses to charges in the Miguna book, Peeling Back the Mask, will follow this. But first, we need to peel back the mask that Miguna Miguna himself wears. Let us examine the untold Miguna Miguna story.

Anyone who has watched Miguna on television will have seen the staring eyes, the jabbing finger, the overbearing ranting and raving. But it was Justice Mohamed Warsame who referred very succinctly to Miguna’s inner turmoil, in dismissing, on December 15, 2011, the case Miguna had brought challenging his August 4, 2011, suspension from the Prime Minister’s office.

In his judgement, Warsame made some interesting observations about Miguna. Speaking of his own perceptions (not issues raised by lawyers), Warsame said that Miguna was a man “who exhibits mental and emotional fits in his defence of issues”.

He spoke of Miguna as having a “relentless sense of fighting back”, as one “who appears unpredictable and ready to fight”. Warsame added, “He is described as a man living in [a] mental darkroom.”

It is from the turmoil of this “mental darkroom” and out of his “relentless sense of fighting back” that Miguna decided to do his very best to destroy the man for whom he had previously and fervently declared his “love”, and whom he revered.

Miguna is a man of wild extremes. His actions have nothing at all to do with Raila Odinga. They have everything to do with Miguna Miguna, his lack of balance, and his distorted sense of self.

Let us begin by setting straight the record concerning the relationship between Miguna Miguna and Raila Odinga. Contrary to the wildly delusional claim in the publicity for his book, Miguna Miguna was NOT “for six years … the Prime Minister’s most trusted aide”.

Miguna Miguna was NEVER the Prime Minister’s most trusted or most senior aide. The fact is that Raila never felt he could fully trust Miguna, and that is why he deliberately kept him at arms’ length in an office on Nairobi Hill, and never allowed him to operate from his own town-centre office.

Trust is surely something that must be declared by the person doing the trusting. The Prime Minister has never voiced or shown such trust. The claim is entirely of Miguna’s own fabrication.

Then there is the “six years” Miguna speaks of. By his own admission, Miguna met Raila Odinga for the very first time in October 2006. Note that that is not yet six years to date.

Raila had gone to Toronto at the start of a speaking tour and from there continued to a number of similar functions in the USA. Miguna, of his own volition, traveled along with the party from his home of two decades in Canada, to Raila’s next stop, in Minnesota, which was the first of many on that tour – Washington DC, Atlanta, Huston, Omaha, Kansas City, New Jersey.

Miguna has claimed that he paid for this trip and met the expenses of Raila Odinga, a man he had never previously met, and certainly a man who had no need of or desire for Miguna’s sponsorship.

The tickets for the trip were, as confirmed by Raila’s friend Paddy Ahenda, who over the past weekend has consulted the relevant records, bought in Nairobi through travel agent Al Karim.

From that first meeting in Toronto, we fast forward four-and-a-half years – not six years – to the day Miguna Miguna was, on August 4, 2011, suspended from the office of the Prime Minister for conduct unbecoming.

During those four-and-a-half years, Miguna was an employee of the Prime Minister’s office for just under 2½ years, having been appointed by President Mwai Kibaki on March 6, 2009.

Six years? Miguna Miguna is a master of exaggeration and fantastical ravings.

After that first meeting in October 2006, Miguna (who, like everyone else, could calculate that Raila Odinga had a very good chance of taking power in Kenya the following year) apparently took stock of his own situation in his adopted country, and decided that this was his opportunity to leave behind a chequered and rather uncomfortable past, and to reinvent himself back in his homeland.

Much of Miguna’s legal work in Canada had consisted of assisting immigrants, including immigrants from Kenya. In the course of this work, the 40-year-old Miguna had been publicly arrested on November 4, 2002, and charged with sexual assault on one of his clients, a 19-year-old woman.

Miguna appeared in court for trial on July 14, 2003, when he was rearrested and charged with further counts of sexual assault on another immigration client.

The trial judge acquitted Miguna, ruling that the alleged victims’ evidence was partially contradictory and not strong enough (as so often happens in sexual assault cases) to sustain a secure conviction. The trial judge did not, however, rule that Miguna’s accusers had acted maliciously, nor that they had formed a conspiracy, nor that they had lied.

Miguna reacted in a manner we have come to recognise – by suing everyone in sight. The defendants ranged from the Queen of England through the Canadian minister of justice, crown attorneys and the Toronto Police Board, to police officers involved in his arrest, for what a Canadian Appeal Judge called “a galaxy of reasons, some existent in law, and many not”.

Miguna also sued a newspaper that had printed a police appeal asking anyone else who believed herself a victim of Miguna’s unwanted attentions to come forward.

Miguna sought Canadian $17.5 million in damages, but he lost just about all, if not all, the more than 20 cases he launched, ending up having to pay out tens of thousands of Canadian dollars.

Dismissing some of the cases, the Appeals Judge referred to Miguna’s “allegations based on assumptions and speculation” and said that Miguna could not “merely plead allegations that he believes may or may not be true”.

Miguna was apparently operating in the realms of fantasy and speculative allegations even then. It seems to be a pattern.

But now an opportunity to escape all that had presented itself. Miguna must have eyed his new acquaintance with Raila Odinga as the chance of a lifetime.

Throughout the following year, while still in Canada, Miguna tried to cement this plan by bombarding Raila with unsolicited and unwanted advice.

This is what Miguna now describes as having been a political strategist for Raila during the period. Knowing Raila, I doubt he ever even read those communications, or had time to give them any of his attention.

Raila Odinga is a consummate political strategist. Why on earth would he need to depend on a man who had been out of the country for 20 years, having run away at the first hint of trouble in 1987 – at the same time as Raila Odinga and many others were undergoing the torturous conditions and life-threatening privations of Kamiti, Shimo la Tewa, Manyani and Naivasha maximum security prisons?

Raila suffered many years of three separate detention periods and went into exile when a fourth threatened – but he stayed away only a few months, and then he returned to continue the fight for change. Unlike Raila, Miguna stayed away living a very comfortable life in a western nation for two decades, leaving it to genuinely committed others to fight the real battle for reforms.

During 2006-2007, Miguna was also trying to raise his public profile prior to his return to Kenya by bombarding newspapers with his articles. Many people became dismissive. Miguna was not back in the country yet but he was already becoming a figure of fun, not taken seriously. It is sad, for an intelligent man. But he brought it on himself.

Eventually, Miguna returned to Kenya, in September 2007, just in time for parliamentary nominations. He tried his luck in Nyando and failed miserably at the ODM nomination stage, gaining miserably few votes. Characteristically, he lost no time in instituting a court case.

Miguna then threw himself into working hard to become a member of Mr Odinga’s inner circle, tagging on to the group of advisers around Mr Odinga, some of whom had been Mr Odinga’s close friends for decades.

One thing that was not in question then was Miguna’s loyalty to Raila Odinga. But it became apparent that this was no ordinary loyalty. It seemed more of an unhealthy obsession. In fact, Miguna’s fervent declarations that he “loved” Raila Odinga eventually became somewhat embarrassing and worrying.

Miguna vociferously defended Mr Odinga at every turn, including during the disputed 2007 election count, when Miguna was present at KICC – as a volunteer activist, like many others involved in the campaign. Because of his size, his attitude and his brashness, Miguna was always seen and heard. He was difficult to avoid.

After the elections, Miguna was out of work for more than a year. The Prime Minister eventually agreed to take pity on Miguna, and offered him the post of ‘adviser on coalition affairs and joint secretary [with Kivutha Kibwana for PNU] to the committee on management of coalition affairs’.

That was more than a year after the coalition government had been formed. It had taken that long for people to persuade the PM to employ Miguna. The PM remained very wary and uneasy about the idea (in hindsight, how wise his judgement was!) but he succumbed to persuasion from within his team.

The deciding factor for everyone was Miguna’s apparently unbounded loyalty and his support for Mr Odinga’s championship of national reforms. Miguna’s legal history in Canada was presented in sanitised form, without mention of the charges against him, of which, in any case, he had been acquitted.

What was not fully evident at the time was just how inappropriate Miguna’s behaviour in public life would become. His grotesquely swollen ego would cause endless problems within the Prime Minister’s office and among the coalition partners.

His attitude gave rise to countless complaints from people who failed to find a way of forging a working relationship with Miguna, and who often finally had no option but to retreat in fear and dislike.

One employee even went to the lengths of writing to the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights because of treatment meted out by Miguna.

He was, for example, though not yet employed in the Prime Minister’s office, present at coalition talks at Kilaguni in 2008.

To the intense embarrassment of the Prime Minister and the distress of everyone else involved, Miguna took it upon himself (after rearranging the chairs to his satisfaction, as he writes in his book) to circulate an agenda that had not been agreed, and thus virtually singlehandedly drove the last nail into the coffin of the talks.

No one could contain him. People who were present can attest to the severe public dressing-down Miguna got from the Prime Minister at the time. It was only one of many occasions on which the PM would similarly have to rebuke him.

Of course, Miguna himself has put a different spin on this story, so that it does not reflect badly on him. Others who were present can tell a different tale.

Miguna’s self-regarding behaviour again almost led to a diplomatic incident at a Rome Statute meeting in Kampala, where Miguna publicly contradicted the head of the Kenya team, former attorney-general Amos Wako, and also quarrelled with embassy staff there over the quality of his vehicle and his hotel room – which apparently was not superior enough for one of Miguna’s self-adjudged status.

Afterwards, Kenya’s foreign minister was forced to report to the Prime Minister’s office that Miguna “lacked tact and could easily have attracted a fight had it not been for the extreme restraint by the AG and others”.

Miguna Miguna has no brakes. He never knows when to stop. He is loud and large and pushy and intimidating. He is completely insensitive to other people’s reactions to him, and he appears unable to judge where situations require restraint and diplomacy.

Miguna only understands one language – the language of confrontation. He has no idea what it takes to keep a vulnerable political arrangement in place. He would prefer to destroy everything around him, as he has come close to doing so many times, on the excuse of “principle”.

This is not principle. Miguna thinks that shouting louder than everyone else and intimidating them shows “principle” in resolving issues. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Miguna has no understanding whatsoever of the diplomacy and political strategy involved in ensuring that this country has remained stable under a government of competing forces. If Miguna had been in charge of the coalition, it would have collapsed long ago, and that might well have seen our country on fire once again.

It is not cowardice – one of his charges against Raila Odinga – that has achieved the comparatively smooth running of this very difficult arrangement. It is the wisdom to know when to insist, when to give way, when to bide time.

Miguna’s lack of political wisdom, which in his case is replaced by the equivalent of bludgeoning people over the heads with an axe, is the reason he became a dangerous loose cannon and a terrible liability to both sides of the coalition arrangement.

He arrogated to himself authority he did not have – and this is very evident in his prose. “I did this, I did that, I summoned people to a meeting” – and sometimes “we” did this or that.

Who is this “we”? Miguna’s behaviour ensured he had no friends in the PM’s office or in other arms of government. He simply inserted his unneeded and unwanted presence everywhere, going completely beyond his mandate. He had none of the authority he assumed, nor any of the leadership skills that he pretends in his overblown writing.

All that Miguna writes is evidence of his bloated sense of self. His overbearing behaviour was a serious embarrassment in every meeting he attended, as anyone who was present can attest to.

He pushed himself in everywhere, and no one could negotiate in the face of his belligerence. He still doesn’t understand this. He appears constitutionally unable to.

It might be appreciated from all this how very difficult it increasingly became to involve Miguna Miguna in any official duties, without feeling concern that some sudden eruption of frenzied fury on his part would jeopardise delicate negotiations.

He was rude to his staff, rude to his colleagues, rude to his employer, rude to everyone in the coalition partnership and rude to everyone he wrote about with his poison pen in his regular Star newspaper column. It was exhausting for everyone having to cope with this on a daily basis.

And contrary to his claims, Miguna did not write his Star column at the behest of the Prime Minister. It is a fact that Miguna eventually falls out with many of the people he encounters, and it is no surprise to know that, true to form, he has since fallen out with the Star management and no longer has a column in that newspaper.

One of my journalistic colleagues has raised an interesting question: Did Miguna always seek to attract hatred towards Mr Odinga? Was that why he wrote the way he did in the Star, always stirring painful controversy and calumny against the PM?

It is food for thought, especially in light of one of the most startling revelations to come out of Miguna’s book. He says people were jealous that, if Raila Odinga were not there, Miguna would be a contender for leadership of the Luo community.

Was this what Miguna always had in his mind? Was he, in fact, a fifth-columnist? It would certainly explain a lot and is an intriguing proposition, one that bears further scrutiny.

Back at the office, Miguna had also refused to sign the terms of his three-year contract, citing his lower remuneration than that of Kibwana, his opposite number in the coalition arrangement.

Kibwana was vastly more experienced in government, including having been a Cabinet minister in more than one ministry as well as a university professor – details that Miguna apparently felt should not be taken into consideration. Miguna was thus on a month-to-month arrangement.

The hostility between Miguna and Kibwana from day one meant that the two men met no more than twice. They could never agree on an agenda or the minutes of the two meetings they did attend. Miguna could no longer do his job.

Miguna made a signboard that he erected on his office door: ‘Permanent Secretary’ it declared, among other things. Miguna was nowhere near the level of permanent secretary. He was junior in rank to the PS in the PM’s office, to the PM’s chief of staff and to others. Miguna operates from behind a dense cloud of self-delusion.

He behaved as if he were in charge of everything, everywhere. From his book, if Miguna is to be believed, he was the prime mover, the chairman, the convenor, the secretary, the leader of every single department or committee touching the Prime Minister’s office. This is so far from the truth as to be completely ludicrous.

A further problem arose. As anyone who has worked in government or the civil service knows very well, rumours, lies and backbiting are rife. People are constantly trying to bring others down. Miguna took everything he heard as being God’s honest truth.

He was extremely gullible and he exploded loudly on a regular basis, derailing serious discussions to veer off into what became his familiar realms of fantasy.

It is in this light that the PM’s tongue-in-cheek remark “Who told Luos not to make money?” should be read – sheer exasperation at Miguna bursting in yet again to disrupt the agenda of a government meeting with his latest baseless rumour.

It was embarrassing because it was nonsensical. Miguna was often chasing ghosts, and this became a huge encumbrance to operations in the Prime Minister’s office.

By 2011, Miguna had become an onerous liability for the Prime Minister and an overwhelming impediment to the smooth functioning of the PM’s office and to relations with other arms of government. Miguna’s consequent suspension on August 4 came as an enormous relief to many people.

As for Raila Odinga, he remains the person he has always been – a committed and untiring fighter for justice for his compatriots. His love of his country is in the lifeblood that runs through his veins.

Miguna has apparently said he detected that the Prime Minister once shed tears. Certainly, injustice can move Raila Odinga emotionally – and we say, thank God he is such a man.

Thank God he is not a man like Miguna and some others in this country, whose hearts contain the cold-blooded vengeance that gives them the ruthlessness to destroy anyone who stands in their way.

Leaving aside the PM’s eye condition – which causes his eyes to shed tears spontaneously, and for which he has so far had a number of operations, in both Kenya and Germany, without full resolution of the problem – Raila Odinga would be in good company if he wept for his nation and its lost opportunities.

Winston Churchill has been described as the most tearful politician of all time. In his own diaries he noted how he would weep in both triumph and despair. Second only to him was Abraham Lincoln, who would weep with emotion even on hearing the ‘Battle Hymn of the Republic’.

Dwight D Eisenhower wept publicly as he encouraged his troops before D-Day during World War II, George Washington wept at his own inauguration, General Colin Powell wept on Barrack Obama’s election, and Obama himself wept publicly when his grandmother died.

These tears are signs of warmth, genuineness and humanity. They are tears that signify a true and unalloyed belief in something good, something beyond the selfish. Let us all thank God that these traits, and this kind of disposition, distinguish the person who will be our next president.

Mr Miguna’s writings must be seen in their true light. It is the sad light of vengeance – a personal, blinding, hate-filled vengeance of a kind that appears to have characterized so much of Mr Miguna’s life, and which, in his spite and malice against the man who gave him the rarest of opportunities to serve his country, was his guiding spirit in writing this book.

MigunaMiguna by Sarah Elderkin;




 mar2.jpgChief Justice Maraga and Justice Lenaola are some of the smartest lawyers we have in Kenya today and having reached the peak of their career at SCORK, in late 2016 they decided that they were too smart and intelligent to serve in a government led by Uhuru and Ruto who they felt were their intellectual juniors.

After several secret meetings they hatched a plan to make the judiciary the superior arm of government in Kenya and force the other two arms – the Executive and Parliament – into submission under them.

PARLIAMENT would be easy since Kenyans already had a very low opinion of elected politicians and all the judiciary would need was to allow the inherent greed of parliamentarians to grow the perception that this was a junior arm to the Judiciary. They would also send word out to other judges to allow parliament get whatever it wanted so as to annoy the public. They allowed parliament to reverse the SRC laws on salaries, get car grants the current crop of Mps are winning every case filed against them. This has made Kenyans fed up of Parliament and most members of the public don’t take them seriously any more.

After kicking Parliament out from public goodwill, the next plan was to undermine the executive. This was going to be a lot harder – and they would need help.

They first co-opted the civil society to ensure there is formation of a coalition to ‘check’ government excesses. The responsibility to manage this sector was given to DCJ Mwilu who they co-opted into their scheme, though the two didn’t tell her the whole plan as they did not think she could keep it confidential from Senator Wako and Speaker Muturi with who she had children. But they kept her close enough for when they would need numbers on the SCORK bench.

Once the NGO fraternity was in play they then reached out to the opposition through James Orengo. They co-opted the opposition into the conspiracy using the argument that jubilee had gone rogue and was bad for Kenya – and that only the judiciary stood in the way of a complete dictatorship. They told them they wanted to cause a constitutional crisis that would ensure only a coalition government of Jubilee and CORD/NASA would govern Kenya. This was an easy argument to sell to an outfit that was sure it would not make it to government through elections.

They then got the NGOs and the Opposition into a working partnership, and encouraged them to bring cases and politically attack and undermine strategically all those institutions necessary for security of the elections; starting with the IEBC and including the police, treasury, and even the military. This concerted attack against the electoral process was carried out with alarming success.

On 1st September 2017 SCORK then nullified the presidential election despite the fact that Uhuru Kenyatta had won clearly. Raila had not even seen the need to petition but Maraga personally guaranteed him that they would ensure Uhuru’s victory was overturned. However even he was shocked at the decision SCORK gave.

The trio of Maraga, Lenaola & Mwilu immediately became heroes – especially to Raila followers. However it also made them some very powerful enemies around Uhuru, but these they believed they could deal with once they forced Uhuru into a coalition government with Raila.

The whole idea behind nullification was to force Uhuru to react negatively. They expected him to refuse to accept the court decision and even prepped Raila on what to do to rally the country against Uhuru which included mass action which had the support of the courts. This would then result in violence against the state, and the constitutional crisis  they needed would kick in.

Once the country got into crisis the civil society would step in with calls for dialogue which would immediately be taken by the international community. This would lead to a coalition government, with the Judiciary at the top of the food chain of power in Kenya. Maraga would be ‘First Among Equals’ are regards power dynamics in the country with the President forced to follow his instructions to sustain his mandate as head of state, with Raila as Prime Minister with a great debt to Maraga as the attack dog whenever Uhuru failed to play ball.

It was Machiavelli at his finest!

Then took the unprecedented step of following the SCORK order rather than reacting as expected. Maraga and Mwilu panicked. However Lenaola advised that all wasn’t lost; if the repeat election did not happen the constitutional crisis would still happen. Lenaola then reached out to Raila to boycott the repeat election. He also advised Raila to get money from Jimmy Wanjigi and facilitated the civil society and his opposition troops to start a war against Chebukati to have him quit at IEBC. Akombe caves in to the pressure and they jumped on her narrative.

Then the second unplanned event happened. Justice Mativo ruled that the repeat election was open to all those who had run in August. This immediately made Raila’s boycott inconsequential to the repeat election.

Maraga and Lenaola then decided to seek whatever avenues they could get to postpone the election. This would heighten national tension and even cause chaos, which would pressure Uhuru and finally force him into dialogue. They reached out to the NGOs to file a case challenging IEBC preparedness. They reached out to Chebukati to say they weren’t ready. Then they advised Raila to marshall his troops to the streets immediately they made the ruling, to demand for Uhuru to resign which would force Uhuru to reach out for a coalition.

To Maraga and Lenaola this was no longer a strategy to take over power. They were now fighting for their lives and careers. If they failed Uhuru would hang them. He knew what they had done, and had even publicly called them ‘wakora’.

All the cards were ready. The ruling was to happen on 24th October – 2 days to the repeat election. It was meant to be a devastating blow to Jubilee. It would show Uhuru – who had been out campaigning for the 26th election as impotent and at the mercy of the judiciary. It would show a triumphant Raila, who had insisted that there would be no election. The despondency that would engulf the Jubilee support base would be the last straw that would force Uhuru Kenyatta to the negotiating table.

The government tried to stop the judiciary from sitting to take this decision by first making 24th October a public holidays. Maraga, in one of the signs that showed he now considered himself – and the Judiciary superior to the executive – countermanded the executive and instructed that courts would operate despite the fact that the executive had declared the day a public holiday.

However this show of might by Maraga triggered efforts to discourage the SCORK members not to sit. On 24th October only Maraga and Lenaola were available. SCORK could not sit. The plan to stop the elections collapsed.

The entire Maraga/Lenaola plan started unraveling once the repeat elections actually happened. Even the desperate efforts by Raila to unleash his supporters to sabotage elections in his strongholds could not save the situation. The elections happened. The results came in with Uhuru Kenyatta now literally unchallenged by law and the constitution. Maraga and Lenaola could do nothing but confirm Uhuru’s election.

On 28th November 2018, as Uhuru Kenyatta and David Maraga stood before millions of Kenyans during Uhuru’s inauguration, both men knew they had been in a war, and one of them had lost. Uhuru Kenyatta was now firmly in office; legally and without challenge.

But Maraga was not done yet.


(Look out for part 2)

Read why Maraga wanted Raila sworn in and how Judge Odunga pulled out at the last minute. Read about the ‘state of emergency’ Maraga was to call for as CJ on a ‘state of the nation’ national address that was to be run live on all Tv stations on the evening of 30th January 2018, after Raila’s swearing; and after the country witnessed the deliberately orchestrated massacre of at least 100 NASA supporters by people dressed as ‘police’ during Raila’s swearing in.

Read also about what Uhuru will do to Maraga, Lenaola and the Judiciary, in coming days.


When Chief Justice David Maraga on September 1 read the order of the majority four judges of the Supreme Court nullifying President Uhuru Kenyatta’s election victory, he read a churchy statement as prologue. “The greatness of a nation lies in its fidelity to its Constitution and strict adherence to the rule of law, and above all the fear of God,” he said.

In the judgment delivered on Wednesday, Justice Maraga and the majority judges despoiled the Constitution, declared that the rule of three men and a woman is far superior to the rule of law, and joined a long list of human beings, starting with Adam and Eve, who openly defied God.

Justice Maraga’s high-sounding calling was unmasked by the court’s judgment to be nothing more than a fanciful embroidery of rhetoric. Happily, the judgment brought to an end the Maraga Court’s priestly pretentions to holiness and constitutional fidelity.

The judgment was a political edict firmly grounded on a philosophy that the end in giving Mr  Raila Odinga a second chance to win the presidency justifies the means deployed by the court to deny President Uhuru Kenyatta victory.



The judgment was a gratuitous judicial attempt to give purpose and meaning to Mr Odinga’s personal peregrinations.

To the court’s credit, the judgment makes no pretence that it was grounded on any known notion of the law. It is brimming with palpable deficiencies and obvious inconsistencies, is doctrinally incoherent, inelegant and insufficiently reasoned, and is defined by a disconcerting, undisciplined, and cavalier approach.

The court heavily relied on questionable presumptions. The judgment was an exercise in judicial populism designed by the four judges to form the foundation of an ambitious judicial empire building enterprise.

The judgment has a false façade of legality and its legal reasoning is so scant that it could not fill a peanut shell. Kenyans can see that the judgment is so political and the legal phrases peppered over it so unconvincing, that the court’s attempt to hide the elephant in a mouse hole is a scene to behold!

The law applicable to election disputes is universal. Our courts subscribe to that approach. For any court to nullify an election, the petitioner must show the court that the irregularities he complains of affect the result.



The test is simple and objective. It is a simple, mathematical approach. It rules out the subjective test that makes the judge rule on his emotions or political beliefs.

In this case, Mr Odinga’s case was cut for him. He was to show the court that the irregularities he complained of would lead to deductions of over 1.4 million from Mr Kenyatta’s numbers and a further addition to his numbers would show he was the winner. Remember in the 2013 presidential petition, Mr Odinga’s task was much easier; he was tasked to show how a mere 7,000 votes should be deducted from Mr Kenyatta’s numbers, so the court could order a re-run between the two candidates.

In 2013 he failed to satisfy the court with such a paltry figure. In 2017, according to Justice Maraga, Mr Odinga has satisfied the court. How? Very simple. Justice Maraga and his colleagues in the court changed the test from a legal one into a political one and ruled that Mr Odinga passed the test with flying colours.

In the process, Justice Maraga and the court inaugurated a hitherto unknown test, which states that garnering the highest votes alone can’t win you an election.



In order to justify the decision by the court to nullify President Kenyatta’s win, the court inaugurated a political test, wrapped in a jiggery-pokery reading of the law.

It states that process of election is as important as the votes a candidate gets. The scope of the “process test” is unknown. No court anywhere in the world had applied such a subjective, fluid, and fragile test to nullify an election.

The process test means that the court has a marking scheme that tests and grades every stage of the election process, right from voter registration to result declaration.

For instance, if the rallies are peaceful, rowdy or violent, the court will grade the candidates accordingly.

The hours polling stations open will also be graded. The transmission of results will be graded too. The long lines of voters are important issues. Instructing your agents or bribing a returning officer not to sign forms is enough to invalidate an election under the process test.

The question the court did not answer is; since the process test can invalidate an election, can a perfect process win an election for a candidate who got the least votes? The court’s judgment is too radical. It takes the say to elect our leaders from ordinary Kenyans and bestows it on the court. It poses a threat to our constitutional democracy.



Mr Odinga never brings legal grievance to the courts. He didn’t in 2013. He didn’t in 2017. Mr Odinga always brings to court a sorrowful bundle of personal grievance informed by the zeal to have his way.

This is further enveloped by a sense of entitlement to be president and four times of near-misses. Mr Odinga doesn’t litigate on facts or empirical evidence. He litigates on his fears, hope and state of mind.

He has loyal and vociferous groups of myth makers in civil society who credit him with all historic milestones in Kenya and make excuses for all his failures.

His complaints before the court were an omnibus full of fiction and wild fantasies. He alleged that computer systems at IEBC were captured and manipulated.

He brought a laughable algorithm formula, which according to him showed how his victory was stolen. He alleged that over 500,000 voters just voted for the president alone.

He alleged that fake polling stations were created and manned by fake returning officers. All these allegations were false, and he knew it. The court found them false.



History will heap all praise and blame for the judgment ultimately on Justice Maraga. By changing the law, and in overruling tens of the court’s past decisions, to give Mr Odinga a second chance and consciously align the court’s judgment with the political aspiration of a single individual, Justice Maraga in the process wrecked the institutional legitimacy of the Supreme Court. Further, he loudly announced to Kenyans that the era of innocence and neutrality of the court is over.

From now on, the court will no longer, and rightly so, be seen as an honest neutral arbiter of political disputes in the nature of a presidential election.

 It will be seen as a court where judges will decide cases according to their personal political preferences. It will be seen as a court with a political agenda, which will not allow certain candidates to win an election.

No doubt, Justice Maraga will be idolised and immortalised in the folklore of Mr Odinga’s supporters. He will bask in the glory of nullifying a presidential election in an African country.

But his gains are the losses of the Supreme Court of Kenya. At a time when great judicial statesmanship was required to shield and protect the court, Justice Maraga was carried away by the excitement of the moment and in palpable excitement threw the court to the political wolves, whom he invited to feast on the flesh and soul of the court.

Column by Ahmednassir Abdullahi



A victory ceremony for a successful candidate in Nyanza ended in chaos in June 2008 after a rowdy section of the gathering with the presiding priest who thanked God in his opening remarks for the victory of the lost.

The agitated mob complained that the priest was giving credit where it was not due. According to them, the candidate had won elections not by the grace of God, but because of “Agwambo” They demanded, therefore, that the priest thank “Agwambo” in the prayers instead of God almighty threatening to beat up the priest and to disrupt the ceremony if their directive was not complied with.

Such is the state of affairs in some parts of the Luoland today that in spite of the proliferation of churches in the region there is frightening decline in religious practice in the region as well as ignorance of religious culture and relativism among the younger generation because of the rituals and who believe not in God but in the forces of darkness and the worship of Baal.

Matters have not been helped by some Luo priests and religious heads who are demanding today that the faithful to qualify for sacrament, baptism of their children or requiem mass for the repose of their souls upon death, they must be supporters of the dominant political class which does not believe in Christianity and Christian names which go with it.

Consequently, nowhere in the country todays is the image of the church more damaged than in Luoland where numerous faithful are already opting to quit in disgust leaving behind a church of that resembles a boat which is leaking in water on every side and which is on the verge of sinking.

By inadvertently shifting their allegiance from God to the section of unbelieving political class, leading priests in Luoland have taken after the jews of Jesus’ time who cheered criminals while mocking those of integrity among them.

As the church of Christ loses grip in Luoland, the political leadership through the worship of Baal has increasingly turned to the world of abracadabra to maintain its stranglehold on the helpless community.

After the general elections in 2002, a 68 year old man called Christianus Tobias Ogutu Ongara from kanyamwa in Ndhiwa constituency, Homa Bay County, confessed before church officials led by Bishop John OKinda of Migori worship centre that he had assisted most Luo members of parliament to win their seats through magical powers. He told a bewildered congregation that he assisted some Luo MPs to win their seats through witchcraft adding that “most of them went to parliament through the magical powers.”

Ongara, who gave his life to Jesus that day, before Bishop Okinda, surrendered his paraphernalia which included a tortoise shell, humanlimbs, dries malegenitals and dried leaves all of which were later doused in petrol and set ablaze in the church compound.

The old man said he got human limbs and male genitals from mortuary attendants adding that it was an easy job “since families of deceased often fear dead bodies and delegate the job of dressing them to mortuary attendants.

Bishop Okinda, after burning the magician’s tools of trade, urged Luo leaders to avoid witchcraft.

“Only God can save us. I urge Kenyans to seek refuge in God and not in demons or magicians,” he said. But the man of the cloth was preaching of deaf ears.

Since Bishop Okinda’s admonition almost one decade ago, an annual clandestine pilgrimage, to “Sumbwanga and Bariati” which are the twin capitals of witchcraft in Tanzania, by some prominent Luo political leaders has increased.

Belief in the powers of magic as opposed to divine intervention among some leading members of the Luo Political class dates back to the days of Jaramogi Oginga during his fierce battle for supremacy and dominance in Luoland Walter Odede and later Tom Mboya, both of whom were devout Christians’ with no time for the occult and magicians.

In 1968 at the peak of his political problems Tom Mboya and the Government of Kenyatta, Odinga contracted the help of a soothsayercum-magician from West Africa.

According to Odinge Odera, his former aide and speech writer in a recent book entitled, “My Journey with Jaramogi,” the magician Odinga brought in was “a Senegalese, a tactical man,” who had been secretly brought into the country courtesy of Dr. Milton Apollo Obote, the president of Uganda, to assist Jaramogi overcome the difficulties he was experiencing with the leadership of KANU and Government. “The Technical Man” withhis two assistants was lodged at a self-service apartment at Hurlingham, Nairobi where Jaramongi conferred with him several times for one week and later in Kisumu.

“At one such meeting with me in attendance,” Odinge Odera continued, “the technical man’ told Jaramogi that his political future was full of hurdles and he saw him (Odinga) and his colleagues in some kind of prison cell at some point! A year later, Odinga and his followers were detained!

Over one decade after this incident, Odinge Odera witnessed yet another encounter between Jaramogi and another sooth-sayer-cum-magician. He also narrates this in his book, “My Journey with Jaramogi” thus:

“About ten days before the abortive coup by the personnel of the Kenya Airforce on August 1, 1982, I paid a courtesy call on Jaramogi at his Kisumu lakeside home.

“With him was a Mzee he introduced as a friend from one of the islands of Rusinga and Mfangano on Lake Victoria. My presence made the man somewhat nervous until Jaramogi reassured him that he needed not worry about my presence. He then requested Jaramogi if he could proceed with his monologue, to which permission was granted.

The mzee had paraphernalia which he had spread out on the floor and which he glanced at from time to time as he talked. At some point he told Jaramogi; you see, Iam seeing plenty of blood and dead bodies of people scattered on the streets of Nairobi.” He was not interrupted while he kept murmuring and muttering in a low deep tone , as if possessed by unseen forces. He went in some kind of séance. He then then sat up suddenly and when he had sufficiently recovered, he addressed Jaramogi, “Mzee there is alike hood  of some kind of trouble in the country in the near future but you will not be in any mortal danger.” Ten days later there was blood shell in Nairobi when junior Airforce officers staged an abortive coup de tat.

From the above it goes without saying that Odingawas a firm believer in soothsayers, magicians and marabouts. With his increased influence in Luoland especially after the death of Tom Mboya in 1969 and Walter Odede in 1974, the political dispensation subservient to him rose at the expense of Christianity which quickly subordinated itself to the new political class deeply steeped in magic and the worship of Baal.

In his book, “Not Yet Uhuru”, Jaramogi confessed that he did not take Christianity seriously. Wrote he;

“I was fascinated by the admonitions to godliness and charity towards others but my religious understanding and personal sacrifice to God and Christ were limited. When I was called to baptism I took the occasion lightly. My evangelist teachers had asked me to select a god father and godmother but I did nothing about this nor did I arrange a baptismal name when the day of baptism came and I was called to the alter I could produce no name and no godparents were present. Canon pleydell had come to baptize us and he said go out in front of that large crowd and look for your godmother and godmother! I was at a loss. Stephen Machiala and Loise Amolo wife of Shadrack Osewe came forward on the spot and gave me the names Obadiah and Adonijah. I was called to the alter and baptized but I never liked the names; I never used them though it was it was important in those days to be known by your baptismal name if you were a Christian.”

Many of Odinga’s political supporters subsequently took after him by also   discarding their baptism names and giving the church a wide berth except during campaigns when they would make technical appearances in churches ostensibly to pray but in actual sense to canvas for votes before disappearing in the dens of magicians for nocturnal “technical” assistance.

Over the years, the majority of the political class in Luoland has become addicted to soothsayers and magicians to the extent that many of them attribute their elective positions not to the electorate, but to pagan rituals and other forces of darkness through which they believe that the populace can be blindfolded and held captive forever.

The clergy in Luoland should come out clearly on this issue and state in plain language why they have subordinated themselves to the political class which abandoned the religion long time ago in favor of local and imported marabouts:








Noah Akala Oduwo

The notoriously ruthless ODM gang christened Men-in-Black have kicked out ODM Director of Campaigns Dr Noah Akala Oduwo from the Okoa Kenya Secretariat for being a Jubilee spy.

According to sources at the Okoa Kenya secretariat, Dr. Noah Akala Oduwo was kicked out on suspicion that he periodically leaks ODM secrets to Jubilee for monetary gains. The gang which never acts without the express direction of party leader Raila Odinga, ruthlessly frogmarched him from the meeting.

NASA was holding the parliamentary group meeting at the venue.

Raila, Winnie and Dr Akala

Ironically, Noah Akala is known to once in a while be intimate with Raila Odinga’s daughter, Winnie Odinga. He is also a younger brother to NASA’s key witness in the presidential petition, Dr Oduwo Nyangasi.

The Men-In-Black gang gained notoriety few years back when they stopped the ODM national elections at Kasarani. They were also in the news for ejecting Magerer Langat from Orange House after he started badmouthing the party in the media.

This is not the first time Noah Akala Oduwo has been ejected from Raila’s offices. In 2015 and 2016, he was thoroughly beaten by the security guards of Raila for being a key leaker of information.