Presidential election results declared were not based on evidence, Raila Odinga’s lawyers have said, citing the mismatch of results in Forms 34B and the IEBC online portal.
James Orengo and Otiende Amollo outlined the “glaring errors” in IEBC forms that led to an allegedly rigged election.
Orengo said the forms issued to them and the Supreme Court do not match with their respective constituencies.
“The forms lack the security features and serialisation required and the way the forms are organised is not the way they should be,” Orengo said on Monday.
“These were things that were done and we see names of the candidates in some forms are Raila Odinga, some Odinga Raila … in some its Uhuru Kenyatta or Kenyatta Uhuru while others are written the name of the parties.”
He said the law was very clear that collated results should be prescribed in the same form from the constituency contrary to what the forms had.
“The election must be conducted in accordance to the law. Security features of Forms 34A and 34B included a watermark, anti copying features and UV-sensitivity but these can not be seen in some,” he said.
Orengo said Kenya must get to where leaders write two speeches, one to concede and another for victory.
“We are waiting for a day in Kenya where opposition will concede because they know the election was credible,” Orengo said.
‘FORMS ARE DIFFERENT’
On his part, Amollo accused the IEBC of tampering with Forms 34A and B saying that some were signed by ungazetted poll officers.
“In 13 constituencies (59,8476 votes) forms were signed by ungazetted returning officers. Barcodes in some of the documents lead to locations outside Kenya,” Amollo said.
“Some forms have a different layout suggesting that they were not collectively printed by Al Ghurair firm.”
Amollo said the results from all those ungazetted polling stations must be declared null and void.
He said there was a consistent pattern in difference of votes between Raila and Uhuru throughout the process.
“If by law provided these results were coming randomly from across the country, it is not possible to have such a consistent gap,” he said.
Amollo said it was clear the results were not coming throughout but in batches.
“They were being held somewhere and released in batches. Moreover, the results were not streamed from the polling stations hence not possible to determine from which polling station they came from,” he said.
Amollo said the results were being held and adjusted through an error adjustment formula.
“By 4.07pm results had started streaming, postulates impossible since the polling stations were closing as from 5:00pm,” he said.
Noting that results displayed in the IEBC public portal were mere statistics, Amollo said the errors made were made on purpose.
“These are not errors, these are purposely made mistakes. How did the IEBC announce a winner when they did not have all Forms 34A?” he said.
Amollo said by the time of declaration of presidential results, 10,480 Forms 34A had not been received.
“The results therefore were not based on forms 34A nor forms 34B.The forms 34A account for 7 million votes out of the total,” he said.
‘NO REJECTED VOTES’
Amollo further noted that when Chebukati was announcing the results, he did not tell Kenyans the number of rejected votes in some constituencies.
“In declaring the winner, the chairman did not declare the number of rejected votes yet the law says otherwise,” he said.
He listed some of the counties where the rejected votes were never announced.
They include; Muranga, Samburu west, Soi, Narok north, Nyali, Roysambu, Ruaraka, Embakasi.
Amollo referred to a 14 page affidavit of Dr Edgar Otumba dated August 24, 2017 and that of NASA ICT expertNyangasi Onduwo sated August 8, 2017
Earlier, Raila lawyers were allowed ‘read only access’ to IEBC servers without endangering their firewall.
Supreme Court Judges were expected to rule on Raila legal team’s application to access IEBC servers in search of more evidence on the alleged rigging during the August 8 general election.
Read: Raila wins round one of election court challenge
“The petitioners and the third respondents shall be granted a read only access of information related to number of servers, files without the disclosure of software version,” Justice Isaac Lenaola said on Monday.
More on this: Raila lawyers granted read-only access to IEBC servers
By NANCY AGUTU, @nancyagutu
