The results of a vote recount order by the Supreme Court is out. The report was prepared by the Registrar of the Supreme Court.

It reports that in its general observations that it did not find any major variance between the results that were contained in the availed Form 34As and the results of the vote recount.

“All the Counterfoils for elective seat is in the box. No variance between results as captured in Form 34A and finding as per recount,” the report on the Supreme Court recount says in two of its general findings.

There were nonetheless errors that were noted during the tallying. 6 polling stations did not present form 34A Book 2 at all, 26 presented intact/intact form 34A book 2s and 9 presented used form 34 A book 2s with varying numbers of carbonated copies.

“Some returning officers explained the absence of form 34 A Book 2 by indicating that the presiding officers used them instead of form 34 A book 2,” the report said . “In such cases the team verified the information by looking for the form 34 A Book 1 to confirm if it was indeed intact for purposes of accountability.”

The report noted that the reasons that were given by the Returning officers was that some presiding officers mistook the two books because they did not understand the procedure.

“Other returning officers had no explanation for the absence of form 34 A book 2. They indicated that they had just learnt of the anomaly together with the scrutiny,” the report said.

“The Kiambaa constituency returning officer explained that her presiding officer used book 2 because he had spoilt book 1. They however, they did not present the spoilt form 34A book 1 for the team’s scrutiny, and the PSD did not indicate that the form 34A book 2 had been spoilt,” the report said.

However, the report noted that insufficient training for Presiding Officers led to some of them committing errors regarding placement of Form 34 As in the ballot boxes and mishandling of Booklets.