appears to the tribunal having cognizance of the question that the election was so conducted as to be substantially in accordance with the law as to elections and that the act or omission did not affect the result.” [191] Before the current Kenyan Elections Act, this provision was imported into the National Assembly and Presidential Elections Act, 1992 (now repealed) Section 28 of which provided as follows: “No election shall be declared to be void by reason of a noncompliance with any written law relating to that election if it appears that the election was conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in that written law, or that the noncompliance did not affect the result of the election.” [192] There are clearly two limbs to all the above quoted provisions: compliance with the law on elections, and irregularities that may affect the result of the election. The issue in the interpretation of the provisions is whether or not the two limbs are conjunctive or disjunctive. [193] It is unequivocally clear to us that, the use of the term “and” in the above cited English provisions renders the two limbs conjunctive under the English law. Save for minor changes, the conjunctive norm in the two limbs of this provision as captured in the two English provisions appears to have been borrowed lock, stock and barrel by many Commonwealth countries, notably Nigeria, Ghana, Zambia, Tanzania and Uganda to mention but a few. However, under both the repealed National Assembly and Presidential Elections Act (Section 28) and the current Elections Act (Section 83) the term used is “or” instead of “and” appearing in the English Acts. The use of the word “or” clearly makes the two limbs disjunctive under our law. It is, Presidential  Petition  No.  1  of  2017                                                                                                                                                                                                            78  |  P a g e