[348] Further, a random scrutiny of 4,299 Forms 34A across 5 Counties
was undertaken to check and confirm; whether the forms bore the
watermarks and the serial numbers; whether the forms had been signed
and stamped by the presiding officers; whether there was involvement of
the party agents.
[349] Some of the issues emanating from the scrutiny of Forms 34A were
that:
(a)
some forms were carbon copies;
(b)
others were the original Forms 34As but did not bear the IEBC
stamp;
(c)
other forms were stamped & scanned while others were
photocopies;
(d)
others had not been signed.
[350] The report further indicates that out of the 4,299 Forms 34As, 481
were carbon copies, but signed, 157 were carbon copies and were not
signed; 269 were original copies that were not signed; 26 of the Forms were
stamped and scanned. 1 form was scanned and not stamped; 15 had not
been signed by agents, 58 were photo copies of which 46 had not been
signed; and 11 had no watermark security feature. All these issues
correspond with the Registrar’s observation stated above.
[351] Submitting on the findings, SC Orengo for the petitioners contended
that the report had proved beyond reasonable doubt, that the election
process was shambolic. According to Counsel, the Form 34C which was
used to announce the presidential results had no security features and
Presidential
Petition
No.
1
of
2017
151
|
P a g e
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents