[29] The petitioners also submitted that given the unprecedented case of varying results in the IEBC’s portal and Form 34B provided; inconsistencies between the results displayed and those in the Forms 34A and 34B, the electronic system of transmission was compromised by third parties who manipulated it and generated numbers for transmission to the NTC. [30] Counsel for the petitioners cited the cases of William Kabogo Gitau v. George Thuo & 2 Others5 and Benard Shinali Masaka v. Boni Khalwale & 2 Others6 and urged the Court to look at the entire electoral processes rather than results alone as contended by their counterparts. [31] In the petitioners’ view, all these violations of the law fundamentally compromised the credibility of the presidential election and this Court has no choice but to annul it. (iv) Substantive Non-compliance, Irregularities and Improprieties that Affected Results [32] It was the petitioners’ case that the election was so badly conducted and marred with irregularities that it does not matter who won or was declared winner. The irregularities committed significantly affected the results to the extent that IEBC cannot accurately and verifiably determine what results any of the candidates got, so the petitioners contended. 5 6 William Kabogo Gitau v. George Thuo & 2 Others; Civil Appeal No. 126 of 2008; [2009] eKLR.   Benard Shinali Masaka v. Boni Khalwale & 2 Others, Election Petition No. of 2008; [2011] eKLR.   Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            12  |  P a g e