(k) An Order directing the 1st Respondent to organize and conduct a fresh Presidential Election in strict conformity with the Constitution and the Elections Act. (l) A declaration that each and all of the respondents jointly and severally committed election irregularities. (m) Costs of the petition. (n) Any other Orders that the Honourable Court may deem just and fit to grant. E. RESPONDENTS AND 2ND INTERESTED PARTY’S CASE [51] On 24th August, 2017, the 1st and 2nd respondents filed a joint response, while the 3rd respondent filed a separate response to the petition. They all opposed the petition and urged the Court to find that IEBC conducted a free, fair and credible election in which the 1st petitioner garnered 6,762,224 votes, being 44.74% of the votes case, while the 3rd respondent garnered 8,203,290 votes being 54.27% of the votes cast. In addition, the 1st petitioner and the 3rd respondent also garnered at least 25% of the total votes cast in 29 and 35 counties, respectively. These are the results that the 2nd respondent declared on 8th August 2017, as deponed in his supporting affidavit. (i) Violation of the Principles Set Out in the Constitution, Electoral Laws and Regulations [52] It is the respondents�� case that the presidential election was conducted in accordance with the Constitution, the IEBC Act, the Elections Act, the Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            20  |  P a g e