''Scrutiny proves our case" - Oraro and Kilonzo

Lawyers representing the petitioners in the case challenging the election of Uhuru Kenyatta have submitted that the reports on the sample re-tallying of 22 polling stations supports their case. Kethi Kilonzo, the lead counsel for Africog said that the two reports, prepared after the Supreme Court ordered a re-tallying of votes in 22 polling stations, confirms the allegations they have made in the petition in regard to differences in form 34 and form 36. Ms Kilonzo said the IEBC did not verify results in the 33,000 polling stations, she argued that in Laikipia West, the result announced cannot be verified with the number of votes cast. In Githunguri, she said, "the number on form 36 is different from results cast." Ms Kilonzo argued that “ the returning officer for the presidential race made a decision without completing the tally. “ She added that, “ the court is not simply an adjudicator but it has power to audit results declared by IEBC.”

 Counsel Oraro, representing Raila Odinga said that the results of the report override the issues the petitioner had raised. He said that there were grave errors in form 36, “There was a huge discrepancy in the tallying of the presidential results and the scrutiny done by the principal register have revealed huge discrepancies.” He added that that the scrutiny reveals that registration of voters continued even after the registration closed, "There was no green book produced before this court, not even the register of the number of voters without biometrics” Oraro submitted to the judges that “You cannot rely on the results provided by the IEBC as shown in the scrutiny of results in 22 polling stations.”