
IEBC letter to NASA: “Re: Planned Protests Against the IEBC on the 26th of September 2017 (25.09.2017)




I know I have given Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) a lot of flack. Since their lacking work and also proven respect for the government members, instead of being direct and being critical to their work. Again, they have given a second statement on the Presidential Elections in Kenya. This after they commended it after the 8th August 2017 and was ready to give the powers to the incumbent. We will see in this statement where the IGAD stands, it doesn’t stand by the people or the rights of an honest free and fair election. But more keeping the institutions for the institutions sake. They are defending the IEBC, even after the Supreme Court ruling, which is following the law and codes to follow when concerning Electoral Law. This should be respected, but they fear the approach of reform and question the IEBC even further. Its like its a Multi-National Mouthpiece of the Jubilee Party. Look!
IGAD Statement today:
“The Fresh Presidential Elections scheduled by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) for 26th October 2017, in line with the requirement by the Kenyan constitution that Fresh Presidential Elections be held within 60 days, provide another opportunity for the people of Kenya to show their commitment to their constitution. IGAD has every confidence that the will of the people will again be expressed clearly in the ballot, and that Kenyans will elect their leaders in the constitutionally mandated manner on the 26th October 2017. IGAD is however concerned by statements and actions from some quarters regarding the Fresh Presidential Elections. Statements and actions that undermine the people’s confidence in the ability of the IEBC to manage the fresh elections, as well as unrealistic demands that frustrate IEBC from conducting fresh elections, or indeed calls to boycott the Fresh Presidential Elections, put Kenya on a dangerous path. Whereas, as the Supreme Court determined, IEBC has to make certain critical administrative adjustments and correct certain errors that became evident on the 8th of August 2017. IGAD, based on its prior assessment, is confident that IEBC can execute its constitutional mandate to facilitate the expression by the Kenyan people of their sovereignty. IEBC must thus not be crippled from executing this mandate. Sabotaging IEBC or boycotting the elections will put Kenya in a constitutional crisis and likely on a path to Unconstitutional Change of Government” (…) “IGAD urges all actors in Kenya to reject those who would seek to interfere with the constitutional order by seeking to disrupt or prevent the court-mandated fresh election, thus putting in peril democratic change of government and ushering in a crisis from which unscrupulous actors can seek Undemocratic Change of Government” (IGAD, 2017).
I am disappointed by IGAD. IGAD has again shown their mentality and their reality, that fits the paradigm of the government that they work for and not trying to enforce a better state. They are loyal to their contractors and not loyal to the people. The IGAD proves again, that the state of affairs and loyalty to Kenyatta is more important that actually reform. The IEBC in Kenya needs reforms, it needs to change. The IEBC was ruled against in the Supreme Court, since their manufactured and doctored results could be proven. That they didn’t follow the codes and Electoral Laws. The Supreme Court followed the Constitution and didn’t create a crisis. On the other half, that was created by the IEBC, as they working closely to Jubilee and not validating the ballots and results. That is why the trust between IEBC and the people are at an all-time low. It isn’t the Supreme Court or the Constitution fault, it is the IEBC Secretariat for their decisions to not respect the people’s will.
The IEBC was not sabotaged, it was the IEBC who sabotaged and we’re holding the people hostage with the announced results for the incumbent. The statement proves he could be working in favor of Jubilee, not in favor of just results for Kenyans. Its weird, but not unexpected with the IGAD track-record. Kenyan opposition should and could boycott elections, as long as the IEBC is not reformed, if not is a second possible rigging scenario. Just moths after the other was hold. There been minor changes inside the IEBC Secretariat, but they are not transparent and not giving way for the challenges of possible rigging again. The computer generated Presidential Elections could easily appear in October 26th 2017. It might be a road into uncertainty, and the NASA Coalition knows this. Jubilee knows this too. Its not a clear answer, but the IEBC has to changed, if it will ever get trusted with doing their duty as civil servants. That is not the Supreme Court fault, they are just the messenger.
It would be undemocratic for the IEBC to announce anyone who was rigged into power. That should worry the IGAD, but its not doing so. They are more in-line of the process, instead of thinking of respecting the power of the ballots and announcement of the counted ballots. They are accepting an unconstitutional process, as long as someone is elected. The IGAD is a disappointing organization as they are clearly serving the elites of the nations who are members. Not considering the will of the people, as even them are defending the IEBC. It would be better if they we’re silent instead of releasing this statement today. Peace.
Reference:
IGAD – ‘STATEMENT BY THE IGAD EXECUTIVE SECRETARY ON FRESH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN KENYA’ (24.09.2017) link: https://www.igad.int/executive-secretary/1655-statement-by-the-igad-executive-secretary-on-fresh-presidential-elections-in-kenya






In Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on the 21st September judge H.J. Fabricus dismissed the applications made by Oakbay and other Gupta owned Companies who had an injunction and a case against the Bank of Baroda. Since they closed and terminated their relationship with the Companies in question. This here is really putting the legal precedence on the reason why they we’re legally allowed to do. Even as the Bank of Baroda has given notice to the 20 Companies that was involved in the lawsuit against the bank and its practices.
Clearly, the Courts are not in the opinion of the President. Since he can easily be used the Gupta family and their companies. That is why the ruling of Fabricus is even stating the problems of the Gupta owned business. This should be well-known, it should be put in print and the ones trading with them. Should know their reputation and their worry. That is the reason for Bank of Baroda ceasing to have them as their clients and the companies connected to them.
“Irrespective of whether negative publicity about the client is true, a bank is fully entitled to terminate the relationship with a client that has a bad reputation. I may repeat that in this case, as in the Bredenkamp decision, the bank did not seek to rely on the factual accuracy of the relevant reports, but merely on the particular reputation of its clients” (From the Defense Argument of Bank of Baroda).
This here proves there reason with the wish for departure of the negative publicity, which they have gotten since they we’re connected with the Gupta Companies. That is well-known and their deals are all in the midst of public eye. It is the reason for the troubles of the President and his Party. Since they are using the connection and the family of the President are hired into the companies. This sort of thing, doesn’t make for sound and good business practice. Therefore another argument is really stabbing the case of Gupta and gives reason for the dismissal of the application they made to the court.
“In addition, the fact that the largest banks in South Africa and other firms chose to terminate the relationship with the Applicants in 2016 ought to have provided a clear indication that the Bank of Baroda would also consider the option. On this basis it was simply not correct for the Applicants to assert that the 6 July 2017 termination notice came out of the blue. I have of course also kept in mind in this context that the Applicants did not file a Reply Affidavit giving their version of these assertions of the Bank” (From the Court Ruling, 21.09.2017).
This here really says it all, as the Bank of Baroda followed procedure and took their time, before they gave notice to the Gupta Companies, they clearly, seen other companies and banks doing similar acts. Their desperation is now obvious as they will hold the bank in contempt for their ill-advised financial activity and ill-gained fortunes on the state coffers. Therefore, they are basing their argument on being handled badly, while the Bank actually did what they could to salvage their reputation and not be connected with corrupt regime.
The ruling is also focused on the FICA rules for banking institutions in South Africa, a law that is important for the Bank of Baroda. That the rules are important to monitor “Business relationships or transactions that impose a high risk of facilitating money laundering” and also “the proceeds of any unlawful activity or money laundering activity”. All of this are things that could be put on the Gupta Family and their Companies, as the President and his click is known for corrupt behavior. That would put the Bank in risk of dealing with a high risk client. That is why the bank sent them a termination notice. Since they didn’t want to risk being associated with a high risk client(s). As it is also written in the Court ruling: “It was said that the these heightened duties serve an important purpose in that, given the position and influence held by the PEP’s, there was a heightened risk that they may engage in transactions designed to conceal unlawful transactions and the misappropriation of public funds”. This is really giving in this case, as the Gupta Family and their Coal Industry agreements alone could be put into this category. On that reason alone and with the knowledge of these transactions, that could punish the Bank for knowingly accepting this behavior in their system. They could be sanctioned by the state for their misgivings. That gives the Bank of Baroda further reason for their termination notice.
Furthermore, the Gupta Companies has in the recent months before the termination done dozens of red flagged transactions mounting to R4.25 Billion, which the bank already filed to FIC. Other Banks has terminated the Gupta’s for similar reasons, these being State Bank of India, Bank of India, Standard Bank and ABSA Bank. All of these has terminated their relationship with Gupta Family and Companies. Therefore, the reasons for Bank of Baroda is all there.
So since the Bank of Baroda want to “preserve the integrity of the established financial system and the Rule of Law”, the case was dismissed and the applicants, the Gupta Family didn’t get their “Interim-Interim” agreement with the Bank. Certainly, the are scraping for a good and trustworthy place to have their accounts and transactions. As their businesses has been scrutinized and also openly shown. Therefore, the knowledge of their capacity to act with ill-intent and not accordingly to the law. Is well-known and not just hearsay, its well established as well. So the Bank of Baroda, the 16 staffed business and bank can live on their own. They can be the Bank they want to be, without being forced to deal with the Gupta Family, the Gupta businesses and the red-flagged transactions of these individuals. Peace.














