originating from the same constituency like Bahati in Nakuru County and Kuresoi South; Forms 34A issued but not used; and several of them having differing serial numbers. [42] Dr. Aukot also raised issue with the declaration of the presidential results without all Forms 34A, which he stated was non-compliant with section 39 of Elections Act as directed in the Maina Kiai decision. He echoed the petitioners’ case that the whole process of counting, tallying and transmission of results from polling stations to the CTC and finally to the NTC lacked fairness and transparency. [43] In addition, the petitioners faulted the late publication of the public notice on polling stations lacking network coverage for being unlawful, arbitrary and non-verifiable and contrary to the requirement of 45 days publication before the general elections which was in breach of Regulation 21, 22 and 23 of the Elections (Technology) Regulations 2017. They urged that the 1st respondent’s averments were misleading and contradicted the publicly available Communications Authority of Kenya Access Gap Study Report 2016 which shows that only 164 sub-locations are not network covered and that 94% of the population is covered by at least 2G network services. (vii) Interpretation and Application of Section 83 of the Elections Act [44] On the law, the petitioners argued that by the use of the term “OR” in Section 83 of the Elections Act unlike the term “AND” in the English Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            16  |  P a g e