[261] We have read the extensively reasoned and powerfully rendered decision by the Court of Appeal in Maina Kiai. We find nowhere in that decision where, the learned judges of appeal suggested, or even appeared to suggest that by affirming the High Court’s decision which had declared Section 39 (2) and (3) of the Elections Act, unconstitutional, the Court of Appeal, somehow for unstated reasons, lent judicial imprimatur to the 1st and 2nd respondent to either circumvent, or simply ignore the provisions of Section 39(1C) of the Elections Act. On the contrary, the Appellate Court’s decision was an unstinting reaffirmation, if not a restatement of the letter and spirit of the constitutional principles embodied in Articles 81, 86, and 138 (3) (c), relating to the conduct of elections. And we have shown why that is so. [262] Section 39(1C) of the Elections Act for avoidance of doubt provides that: “For purposes of a presidential election, the Commission shall(a) Electronically transmit, in the prescribed form, the tabulated results of an election for the President from a polling station to the constituency tallying centre and to the national tallying centre; (b) Tally and verify the results received at the national tallying centre ; and (c) Publish the polling result forms on an online public portal maintained by the Commission. Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            109  |  P a g e