J. CONCLUSION [389] In this judgment, we have settled the law as regards Section 83 of the Elections Act, and its applicability to a presidential election. We have shown that contrary to popular view, the results of an election in terms of numbers can be overturned if a petitioner can prove that the election was not conducted in compliance with the principles laid down in the Constitution and the applicable electoral law. Never has the word ‘OR’ been given such a powerful meaning. Why did we do that? [390] We did so because as Judges we have taken an oath (as advocates first and as Judges later). In the two oaths, the fundamental words are fidelity to the Constitution without fear or favour. The constitutional principles that we have upheld in this judgment were embedded and became a critical part of our electoral law. The Legislature in its wisdom chose the words in Section 83 of the Elections Act and in keeping to our oath, we cannot, to placate any side of the political divide, alter, amend, read into or in any way affect the meaning to be attributed to that Section. [391] As for the IEBC, all we are saying is that, the constitutional mandate placed upon it is a heavy yet, noble one. In conducting the fresh election consequent upon our Orders, and indeed in conducting any future election, IEBC must do so in conformity with the Constitution, and the law. For, what is the need of having a constitution, if it is not respected? [392] Having taken note of Mr. Nyamodi’s submissions, which appeared to suggest that IEBC had put in place a complimentary system for the transmission of results; a system that was neither simple nor known to the petitioners, we hereby direct that in conducting the fresh election IEBC Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            170  |  P a g e