(d) Documents for allocated and non-allocated KIEMS kits procured was provided. However, the information on whether the kits were deployed or not was incomprehensive; (e) The Court ordered access to Technical Partnership Agreements for IEBC Election Technology System including a list of technical partners, kind of access they had and list of APIs for exchange of data with partners. The documents were issued with the exception of the list of APIs. The Court appointed ICT Experts said full information on APIs would have enabled determination of what kind of activities may have taken place; (f) The Court had also ordered IEBC to provide the petitioners with the log in trail of users and equipment into the IEBC servers, the log in trails of users and equipment into the KIEMS database Management systems and the administrative access log into the IEBC public portal between 5th August 2017 to date (being the date of the Court Order which was on 28th August, 2017). These were also not provided. Instead, IEBC provided pre-downloaded logs in a hard disk whose source it refused to disclose. The IT experts agreed with the petitioners’ contention that the 1st respondent should have demonstrated that the logs emanated from IEBC servers by allowing all parties to have Read Only Access. Alternatively, the 1st respondent could have accessed the information in the presence of the petitioners’ agents. Partial live access was also only purportedly provided on 29th August, 2017 at about 3.50pm without ability to access the Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            117  |  P a g e