The seven-member bench at the Supreme Court was due to rule on Odinga’s request for the opening up of the servers of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) for inspection, before listening to the lawyer representing Odinga and his running mate Kalonzo Musyoka in court. Odinga wants the Supreme Court to nullify the results of the presidential elections held on Aug. 8, saying the country’s electoral body, IEBC failed to abide by the laws and regulations guiding its conduct. The Supreme Court is constitutionally mandated to rule by Friday on whether the polls were lawfully conducted or to nullify and call for fresh Presidential elections within 60 days, according to the 2010 Constitution. Both the electoral body and President Kenyatta have objected to Odinga’s application to be granted access to the information on the grounds that it not only jeopardizes the integrity of the systems but is impractical given the time constraints the court is facing. They have also accused Odinga of seeking to secure evidence to support his contention that President Kenyatta did not legitimately win re-election.
NAIROBI (Xinhua) -- Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) official carries 34 A, B and C election forms during the last day of the presidential petition hearing at the Supreme Court in Nairobi, Aug. 29, 2017. XINHUA/FRED MUTUNE

The opposition leader claims Kenyatta’s Jubilee party hacked the results transmission system and insists an audit would expose who won the vote.

In his court papers he says that Kenyatta’s victory was based on a mathematical formula and a fixed algorithm factor.

"It is in light of the foregoing that I am advised by my advocates on record, and believe the same to be true, that only a system audit of all the Commission’s infrastructure can answer the many questions and gaps surrounding why what was supposed to be a seamless system of integration of voter registration, voter identification and results transmission, failed at the tail end," Odinga says.

Lawyers and judges have been pressed for time, given that a ruling in the case is required within 14 days of a Presidential election being held.

Without the petition, President Kenyatta would have been sworn in on Aug. 29.

On Sunday, the Supreme Court allowed two other presidential candidates, Ekuru Aukot, whose party, the Third Way Alliance, contested the elections and Michael Wainaina, an independent candidate, to join the petition and make their observations for the consideration of the Court.

Kenya’s main opposition, the National Super Alliance (NASA), which Odinga represented, wants the election results nullified because the IEBC failed to conduct a transparent and verifiable process.

Odinga’s legal team will have five hours to submit its case, IEBC will have three hours to make its submissions and Kenyatta’s defense lawyers will also be given three hours to make their presentation.

Interested parties, Michael Wainaina, Ekuru Aukot and friends of the court Attorney-General Professor Githu Muigai have been allocated 20 minutes each to make their presentations.

Finally, Odinga’s legal team will have one hour to make closing submissions.

President Kenyatta was announced the winner of the polls on Aug. 11, with 54 percent of the votes cast against Odinga’s 44 percent of the votes.

However, Odinga wants the Supreme Court to revise its 2013 decision which removed spoilt presidential votes from the number of votes to be taken into consideration while calculating the percentages received by the candidates in an election.

Odinga’s lawyers argue in sworn statements presented in court that voters who cast a spoilt vote in an election should not be excluded when calculating the final vote outcome and the turnout.

Kenya’s constitution requires an outright winner to garner 50 percent plus one vote.

The number of spoilt votes in the August elections stood at slightly 400,000 votes.

However, while releasing the final results, IEBC Chairman Wafula Chebukati announced spoilt votes stood at slightly less than 80,000. The difference is part of the petition in court.

The Court also allowed the country’s attorney-general as a friend of the court, which allows his office to address the court on matters concerning the application of the constitution.

Legal commentators praised the Supreme Court rulings as "well-reasoned" and stated the decision on whether to open the IEBC computer data banks would also have a significant outcome on the case.

In his suit papers, Odinga wants the Supreme Court to nullify the poll results on the grounds that the IEBC favoured his rival Kenyatta during the elections.

Odinga also says in the court papers that his votes were systematically reduced in some instances and added to Kenyatta’s count and that the errors recorded in the entire process were too gross to an extent that it is nearly impossible to ascertain whether Kenyatta actually won the elections.