Raila's case is a "science fiction that would only interest Hollywood directors"
In his submission, Mr Kenyatta, through his lawyers, argued that the David Maraga led team has “no powers to overturn the will of over 15 million people” even as judges retire to determine the case.
Mr Kenyatta’s lawyers Ahmednasir Abdullahi, Fred Ngatia, and Tom Macharia, purely relied on the highly touted NASA evidence, statistics and maintained that he worn with a clean sweep.
The lawyers led by their lead counsel Fred Ngatia argued that Mr Odinga’s case was not anchored on a fair political contest, but on accounts of greed for power, overlooking the 15 million Kenyans who participated in the voting exercise.
"For the court to agree with the petitioner, it will decide that the votes cast by Kenyans do not count," he submitted. Even if you expunge our documents, this petition will still be dismissed. These are allegations without any evidence. It is a piece of science fiction that only Hollywood directors would be interested in,” said Abdullahi.
Siding with the elections polls team IEBC, Mr Kenyatta maintained that the entire process was conducted in accordance with the constitution. Such sentiments were also shared by international observers and the Law Society of Kenya in their earlier commentaries about the whole exercise.
"The election was done in accordance with the law, invalidating it will mean deconstructing Article 140 of the Constitution and telling Kenyans that what they did was invalid and that they violated their own rights by voting for President Kenyatta," he said.
He quipped that a court could only invalidate the elections on grounds of gross violation of the citation and massive irregularities in the entire exercise.
"The court can only invalidate the election if it is confirmed that an area like Mandera had 20,000 unregistered voters casting their votes of 30,000 people being imported from Uganda to vote in Busia," said Abdullahi.
He added that although the judges may not entirely agree with the 2013 decision to uphold President Kenyatta's win, they should use the findings on the conduct of elections to lay a foundation in determining that the August 8 polls were free, fair, and in compliance with the Constitution.
On his part, Senior Counsel Fred Ngatia maintained that his client (Uhuru Kenyatta) managed to garner thousands of votes from perceived National Super Alliance strongholds.
"The third respondent had garnered majority votes in 39 counties. They gave him more than 25 per cent of votes as required by the law," lawyer Ngatia submitted.
He argued that even on tabulation of all the discrepancies cited by Mr Odinga, Mr Kenyatta would only lose 800 votes and his opponent would gain 900 votes.
"The petitioner is seeking to invalidate a process that was otherwise a valid election. The two candidates had agents across the country and they signed the forms," he added.
Mr Ngatia also told judges that the theory by the Opposition that all polling stations had 700 voters was also invalidated by those stations which had dozens of voters. He also rubbished earlier claims by Mr Odinga of the involvement of the cabinet secretaries on campaigning for Uhuru as baseless, as they were not supported by any law.
"Those allegations against the CSs do not have any foundation," Mr Ngatia concluded.