By now, it is clear that the main objection of the opposition parties to GECOM is that the organisation has announced election results by a mysterious spreadsheet rather than completing verification of the Statement of Polls (SOPs) which it had started to do but which it truncated.
The PPP/C has taken the matter to court to seek redress claiming it has won the election when all the SOPs are properly verified. The PPP/C has copies of original SOPs, which were garnered by their party agents during the day of the poll.
Should the PPP/C lose the election petition, GECOM’s CEO Mr. Keith Lowenfield will then procedurally advise the Chair which party has won.
She in turn will inform the GECOM commissioners for them to sanctify the decision that the Coalition has won.
Obviously, the three government commissioners will vote to sanctify with opposition commissioners voting against. This would require the Chairman to make the casting vote.
Her vote would reveal on which side she stands. Should she vote with the opposition then GECOM would be compelled to go back and verify to include the SOPs, which were left out when the process was truncated.
Should she vote with the government commissioners then the Coalition has rightfully won the elections.
The Chairman would procedurally inform the Chancellor of the judiciary of the results and that would then empower her to swear in the next president.
It stands to reason that unless the GECOM Chair dutifully informs the judiciary no swearing in of the president can constitutionally take place.