Presidential election results declaration forms and access logs of the voter identification and results transmission kits could once again be scrutinised as the Supreme Court determines whether the repeat election was held properly.
The lack of security features in some results forms from some constituencies and polling stations, and failure by the electoral commission to allow full scrutiny of its servers and access logs, played a huge part in the nullification of the August 8 presidential election.
In the petition before the court challenging the October 26 repeat presidential election, human rights activist and lawyer Njonjo Mue wants the apex court to order a scrutiny of the forms and the kits.
Mr Mue, in the petition he has filed with Mombasa-based activist Khelef Khalifa, asked for: “An order for scrutiny and audit of all the returns of the presidential election including but not limited to forms 34A, 34B and 34C.”
Forms 34A are the presidential election results declaration forms at the polling stations, 34B are those at the constituency, and 34C is the one drafted by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) at the national tallying centre, and which is used to make the final declaration.
Besides the scrutiny of the forms, Mr Mue also wants a scrutiny of all forms 32A, and polling day diaries used in the fresh poll.
Form 32A was created by the IEBC to record instances where a voter had been identified using the information in the physical voters’ register as opposed to the digital gadgets.
When it annulled the August 8 poll in a 4-2 majority landmark judgment, the first of its kind in Africa and the fourth in the world, the Supreme Court faulted the IEBC for not heeding its scrutiny order.