President Uhuru Kenyatta on Thursday requested Parliament to move with speed and review the law of precedent in relation to the presidential poll annulment decision.
This comes barely a day after Supreme Court Judge Njoki Ndungu, who in her dissenting opinion, faulted her colleagues for deliberately overturning a previous decision of the court on Section 83 of the Elections Act to favour a finding of nullity of the August 8 Presidential elections results.
Sections 83 of the Elections Act touches on nullification of an election that does not comply with the electoral laws.
In a televised news conference, the President said the Supreme Court owes Kenyans an explanation on what he termed as 'the monstrous injustice' that took place without due regard to evidence.
The President accused Chief Justice David Maraga and his colleagues of failing to evaluate the voluminous forms and other evidence presented by the Commission and the lawyers.
President Kenyatta reiterated that he shall comply with the judgment while insisting that the will of the people had been subverted by the courts.
He reassured the IEBC that the government will do everything to facilitate the undertaking of the October 26 Fresh President Election.
The President and members of his Jubilee Party have not taken the September 1 decision lightly, especially on the campaign trail where they have repeatedly questioned the legality of the four judges overturning the will of voters.
Justice Philomena Mwilu - who was one of four Justices who ruled in favor of the petition, filed by National Super Alliance Presidential candidate Raila Odinga which challenged incumbent President Kenyatta's win - said in a detailed majority judgment that the discrepancies were so widespread as to have affected the final outcome.
"We find that the 2017 presidential election was not conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Constitution and the written law on elections in that it was neither transparent nor verifiable. On that ground alone and on the basis of the interpretation we have given to Section 83 of the Elections Act, we have no choice but to nullify it," said Mwilu.
She noted IEBC's refusal to honour a court order demanding it opens its computer servers left them with no choice but "to accept the petitioner's claims that the IEBC's IT system was infiltrated and compromised and the data therein interfered with, or IEBC's officials themselves interfered with the data or simply refused to accept that it had bungled the whole transmission system and were unable to verify the date.
Odinga had rejected the presidential election results because the poll agency's servers had been hacked.
The judges took issue with the fact that the IEBC announced official results before about a quarter of the result forms had been received.