As Supreme Court judges explained how they arrived at their September 1 verdicts yesterday, hard tackles were flowing on Twitter as lawyers allied to either side of the political divide reacted to the goings-on.
They took to Twitter to express their feelings on the judgment as events unfolded from the apex court.
Lawyer Ahmednasir Abdullahi, who represented President Uhuru Kenyatta in the petition filed by National Super Alliance’s flagbearer Raila Odinga, was among the “learned friends” most vocal in poking holes at the majority decision of the Supreme Court. One of his tweets read: “Pedestrian … too simplistic … shocking.” One Omenge shot back: “You had your day in the court and you disappointed. Forever keep your peace.”
Former Mombasa senator Hassan Omar also replied to Mr Abdullahi: “Grand Mulla, do the SC judges know you are giving your own judgment/dictum on Twitter?”
Mr Abdullahi’s tweeting must have caught the attention of vocal lawyer Donald Kipkorir, who has previously supported the opposition National Super Alliance (Nasa) coalition. “IEBC & UK’s lawyers are busy tweeting from court besmirching the majority decision. What a cheap way to justify their losing,” he typed.
Not one to take such posts lying down, Mr Abdullahi responded: “This type of case you will handle in your next life … way above your level.” To which Mr Kipkorir retorted: “Your contribution to jurisprudence in this country is zero … I have done more constitutional cases than you … Google Kenya Law Reports.”
Former Law Society of Kenya CEO Apollo Mboya was also tackling political scientist Mutahi Ngunyi, who had posted: “Supreme Court judgment is about those who read vs those who can’t read. Why is JB Ojwang not the CJ?”
In response, Mr Mboya chose mockery: “NYS saga is about those who stole vs those who can’t be hoodwinked. Why is Mutahi not in jail?”
Lawyer Eric Ng’eno also posted in support of Justice Ojwang, who spent the better part of the afternoon reading his dissenting decision.
“Is it a coincidence that the dissenting judges are fluent, comfortable and cool? Hardly! They wrote their decisions. Clear conscience shows,” he posted.
One Zahra replied: “That’s not a reading contest. The judges could as well have posted the judgment online.” To which Mr Ng’eno replied: “I am not surprised. Obama recently lamented about creeping anti-intellectualism. We use simplicity to make ignorance palatable.”
Former Budalang’i MP Ababu Namwamba also weighed in on Justice Ojwang’s words, saying: “Proud of my constitutional law teacher the venerable Prof Jackton Boma Ojwang. Now that is what we call a reasoned judgment.”
But one Abdulqani thought otherwise: “Sad to degenerate from being a senior politician to a blogger.” Mr Namwamba had an answer: “Your little closed brain has no capacity to inform you that not everyone who tweets, like Obama, is a blogger. I’m cybersavvy and liberated.”
Mr Miguna Miguna, who was one of the Nairobi governorship candidates in the August 8 General Election, was not left out.
“Brevity is the soul of wit. It’s clear that JB Ojwang’ was just a crammer in school. He is unable to analyse. Too verbose.”
One Wabucha had an answer for him: “With his cramming, he is a Supreme Court judge. You are just a mere Twitter bully, a poem writer and a defeated governor.”
Elgeyo-Marakwet Senator Kipchumba Murkomen posted something that also drew ire.
“Supreme Court has got it wrong on everything: Election process, how technology works & evidence law,” one of his tweets read in part.
One Twitter user felt the urge to reply: “These are matters beyond your comprehension.”
Deputy President William Ruto also used the platform to take a swipe at the majority decision of the court.
“Evidently, a supreme coup on sovereign will of the people was executed on basis of technicalities against their verdict captured in ballots,” he wrote.
One Niqqol had an answer for him: “No wonder bees and #MeruPython are evidently showing up as plagues on this day of minimis verdict.”
Obscurity around Forms 34A described as a mysterious puzzle.