(iii) How should the Court treat rejected/spoilt votes in respect to votes cast in terms of Article 138(4) of the Constitution? (iv) What is the proper constitutional and legal threshold for invalidating a presidential election under Article 140 of the Constitution? (v) What remedies can the Court grant in determining a presidential election petition under Article 140 of the Constitution? [102] On the first issue, the Attorney-General submitted that the determination of the Presidential election dispute should be made within the context of Articles 81 and 86 of the Constitution which sets out both the qualitative and quantitative principles applicable to their conduct, where the qualitative context under Articles 81(e) is as good as the process leading to those results, while quantitatively, the Court is called upon to deal with numbers and figures regarding the threshold for declaration of Presidential results envisaged under Article 138(4) of the Constitution. [103] Citing the scholarly text of Hon Justice (Prof) Otieno-Odek29 of the Court of Appeal, he submitted that the qualitative requirements appraise the entire electoral process prior to and during voting, evaluating whether the environment was free and fair within the meaning of Article 81 (e). He thus urged that substantial non- compliance with this requirement renders the entire electoral results void. For that proposition, he cited the case of Paper by Hon. Hon Justice (Prof) Otieno-Odek titled, Election Technology Law and the Concept of “Did the Irregularity affect the Results of the Elections?” 29 Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            41  |  P a g e