ACCORDING TO THE ELECTORAL ACT 2022; THE “QUICK TRANSMISSION” OF RESULTS “DIRECTLY FROM THE POLLING-UNITS” IS ACTUALLY MANDATORY, AND NOT OPTIONAL.

Section-64:
Sub-Section-(4) A collation officer or returning officer at an election SHALL collate and announce the result of an election, subject to his or her verification and confirmation that the—

(a) number of accredited voters stated on the collated result are correct and CONSISTENT with the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47(2) of this Act; and

(b) the votes stated on the collated result are correct and CONSISTENT with the “votes or results” recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60(4) of this Act.

Sub-Section-(5) Subject to subsection (1), a collation officer or returning officer shall use the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47(2) of this Act and the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60(4) of this Act to collate and announce the result of an election if a collated result at his or a lower level of collation is not correct.

Sub-Section-(6) Where during collation of results, there is a dispute regarding a collated result or the result of an election from any polling unit, the collation officer or returning officer shall use the following to determine the correctness of the disputed result—

(a) the original of the disputed collated result for each polling unit where the election is disputed;

(b) the smart card reader or other technology device used for accreditation of voters in each polling unit where the election is disputed for the purpose of obtaining accreditation data directly from the smart card reader or technology device;

(c) data of accreditation recorded and transmitted directly from each polling unit where the election is disputed, as prescribed under section 47(2) of this Act; and

(d) the votes and result of the election recorded and transmitted directly from each polling unit where the election is disputed, as prescribed under section 60(4) of this Act.

Sub-Section-(7) If the disputed result under sub-section-(6) were otherwise found not to be correct, the collation officer or returning officer shall re-collate and announce a new result using the information in sub-section-(6) (a)-(d).

Sub-Section-(8.) Where the dispute under sub-section-(6) arose at the level of collation and the returning officer has satisfied the provision of sub-section-(6) (a)-(d), the returning officer shall accordingly declare the winner of the election.

Sub-Section-(9) A returning officer or collation officer, as the case may be, commits an offence if he or she intentionally collates or announces A FALSE RESULT and is liable on conviction to a fine of N5,000,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least three years or both.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION” AND THE IREV-PORTAL..

The “Current” System for the INEC’s Electronic Transmission is called the “Collation Support and Results Verification System -- (CSRVS)”..

It is the INEC’s Online Transmission and Online Collation System for the moment. It is the system to which all the results are supposed to be directly transmitted to.
The collated results are then used by the Collation Officers to verify the results..

This particular system is not meant for the PUBLIC VIEW.. And it is protected with a very strong and tight cyber-security system.
The results that are uploaded into this CSRVS System are NOT in pictures format.
They are most-probably keyed-in by the Presiding Officers.

In the future, the INEC might develop another better system for the purpose of Direct Transmission and Collation of Results from the Polling-Units., but for the moment, the CSRVS is the current Electronic Transmission System.

On the other hand, the IREV-Portal is a portal where the members of the Public Can log in to see the uploaded photos of the Polling-Unit Result-sheets. These uploaded photos on the IREV-Portal are just there for the viewing.
The only function of the IREV-Portal is just for the viewership-sake of the members of the public.
The protection security of the IREV-Portal is not as strong and as tight as that of the CSRVS System.

helinues:


Create a fresh thread and tag me make I enlighten you

BluntCrazeMan:



Here is a new thread..
You can now read it very well,, and then teach me more...

Clause 38 of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022 stipulates thus: “Upon completion of all the Polling Unit voting and results, procedures, the Presiding Officer shall:

-(i) Electronically transmit or transfer the result of the Polling Unit, direct to the collation system as prescribed by the commission.

-(ii) Use BVAS to upload a scan of ES8A to INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), as prescribed by the commission.”

-INEC Counters NASS, Says Nationwide E-transmission Of Election Results Possible

-Reveals commission, NCC, telcos committee okayed e-transmission capacity

-Obtains GPS coordinates of 176,846 polling units for seamless results’ uploading.

-Inside: Faces of 52 senators who voted against e-transmission of poll results

helinues:
I modified.Inec as an independent body have right to determine whatever method would work for the agency....

INEC failed to adhere to its own statements and guidelines, which derive from its laws, that election results would be uploaded to its portal using the BVAS directly from the polling unit in real-time for the public’s viewing,” 

Racoon:


'Chatham House: Nigeria’s Presidential Election Not Conducted in Line with INEC’s Guidelines."
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2023/03/08/chatham-house-nigerias-presidential-election-not-conducted-in-line-with-inec

You have been running to nowhere like a headless chicken speaking for INEC. Please let INEC who have repeatedly reassured Nigerians that it would electronically transmit election results but failed to do so explained. Zawanuike!

helinues:
Section 50 subsection 2 of the new electoral law made itself clear.

The determination of transmitting of results shall be determined by the committe which is INEC. There is no place in electoral act where transmitting of results is mandatory.

Now let's go back to INEC, Prof Yakubu and his team were just so smart not to relay the live transmitting of results to their public portal but instead received them in the back end servers. What do you think would have happened if there are errors in results displayed online and the one displayed physically? Candidate A winning online while candidate B winning in INEC declared results physically.

If you followed the election results announcement, Prof Yakubu always mentioning the states that are ready to come and present it cos they have received the results in their servers and also verify with what they are declaring physically .

INEC did not declare the winner on online, it's in real life meaning the physically delivered election results is what Inec will use to announce the winner not Online.

Inec is an independent body that can make their decision on their own, even SC can't tell them what to do but can make suggestions or recommendations. They chose physical delivered results to announce the winner as an independent body

So be it


BluntCrazeMan

helinues:


I modified...

Inec as an independent body have right to determine whatever method would work for the agency.

Even that argument of transmitting of election results electronically is mandatory, so If INEC received the transmitted results at the back end server without uploading it on public portal, how have they broken the law?

Where in the electoral act where INEC are mandated to display the transmitted results in public portal?

Like I said, trucks would deliver Apc affidavits cos even whatever the petition PLP ( People's Labour Party) might come up with have already been considered earlier.

Obi claimed because 11m million registered for this election and 93% collected their Pvc yet there was a low turn out.

Did Peter Obi actually believed 93% of Nigerians collected their Pvc, what was the total registered voters in Peter Obi's agulu polling unit, how many voted, how about is ward, LG and Anambra in general. How is the low turn out in Anambra state different from what other states in Nigeria experienced?

Those Pvc's that was dumbed inside the bush, are those not part of the 93% of the collected Pvc?

BluntCrazeMan:



The law didn't tell the INEC to display the Transmitted Results to the public..
But the law made it MANDATORY for them to transmit results, and to use the Transmitted Results for the purpose of “Verification and Confirmation of all the collated results” in front of Party-Agents Only.

So, the argument here is not whether they transmitted and displayed to the public..

The Argument is: “Whether they transmitted” in the first place?? And More Importantly, “Whether they used the Transmitted Results to Verify and Confirm all those collated results nationwide”.

helinues:


If INEC had the results transmitted in their back-end server without uploading it on public portal, then the petition about the electronic transmitting would be quashed early.

Btw, do you think the physical delivered results were not cross checked with with Inec received online before making the final declaration?

BluntCrazeMan:



I am not thinking..
I am telling you..


As far as the Presidential Election is concerned..
The physically delivered results were not cross-checked with with INEC received online-results before making the final declaration

helinues:


Your emboldened part is just something ridiculous. Did you follow the announcement of results in Tv? Prof Yakubu said behind the building there is another building where results will be checked before coming to the main tally center.

Infact he advised any political who have any questions or issues with some results to go that building and make proper complain, the Opaque 4 Dino was disgracing himself.

How was Prof Yakubu knew the state ready if they have not been attended or verify the results they are bringing. Scope only read the figures remember

To be a Prof no be beans

BluntCrazeMan:
Prof. Jega used same cross-checking methods far-back in 2015.. This same Prof. Yakubu used the same cross-checking methods in 2019 when there was no “Server”..

Whatever they were cross-checking is just to make sure that the results didn't have “Total Voters” being more than the “Accredited Voters”, and all other checks.

They didn't have any data transmitted directly from the Polling-units..

NONE of the Wards, LGAs, or States received any DATA with which to Verify and Confirm their collations, and thus,, NONE of the Collation Officers Nationwide carried out the Compulsory Verification and Confirmation, as required by the Electoral Act 2022.



I'm not just telling you this for telling sake.
If you know any ward-collation officer in the Presidential Election, ask the person.
(Even any Party Collation-Agent can tell further too)

BluntCrazeMan:
Prof. Jega used same cross-checking methods far-back in 2015.. This same Prof. Yakubu used the same cross-checking methods in 2019 when there was no “Server”..

Whatever they were cross-checking is just to make sure that the results didn't have “Total Voters” being more than the “Accredited Voters”, and all other checks.

They didn't have any data transmitted directly from the Polling-units..

NONE of the Wards, LGAs, or States received any DATA with which to Verify and Confirm their collations, and thus,, NONE of the Collation Officers Nationwide carried out the Compulsory Verification and Confirmation, as required by the Electoral Act 2022.



I'm not just telling you this for telling sake.
If you know any ward-collation officer in the Presidential Election, ask the person.
(Even any Party Collation-Agent can tell further too)

helinues:


You are actually contradicting yourself or perhaps have little information about the election process.

The transmission of results electronically was done at the state level. The Scope and the Rec transmitted their results electronically before delivered it in person.

Again, how did INEC chairman know the results that are ready by calling the state for presentation if they have not been verified.

garfield1:


Stop talking rubbish man.who told you no collation officer received any data transmitted from the polling units? Where you at the collation centres? Do you realize that inec chair already had an online copy of state results? Do you realize that even state recs had copies of results on their system while each lga returning officer was calling them? Have I not told you that any dispute regarding pilling unit is settled at the wards not abuja ?why are you so obsessed with this nonsensical narrative

helinues:


Sometimes, I wonder is some of you people don't read what you circulate logically before doing copy and paste.

Go and present your concocted results claiming of victory at court and be finally disgraced.

Tinubu already gave an hint how is presidency would look like by setting a committee for reconciliation meeting with the agrieved parties cos everything no be gra gra.

Should they still insist of going to court, bring it on baby but remember, before end consideration of taking your landlord to the court, make sure you have secured another apartment somewhere else..

BluntCrazeMan:



I was at one of the Ward Collation Centers..
There were no pre-received online copies or transmitted copies (or soft-copies for that matter) of already transmitted results in any system there..

The collations that were done at the wards were delivered to the next center.





You see this thing you wrote about the State-Recs??

All the 8,809 Wards Collation Centers, and 774 LGA Collation Centers are supposed to have the results of the respective Polling-units under them Simultaneously gathered in their systems, with the Results also already collated inside these systems as they were gathering..

And as the results are being gathered in these lower collation levels, they are also supposed to be simultaneously gathered in all the 37 State-Level collation centres, and then, all of them finally gathered at the National Collation Center..

It is not the States Collation Centers that are supposed to be transmitting the results, that is, If Tamper-proof was intended..
And indeed, Tamper-proof was intended in the Electoral Act..

BluntCrazeMan:
You're thinking that the aggrieved party here is Obi himself.??



The Aggrieved Party is THE OBIDIENTS..
The Obidients took a shot at the Presidency through Peter Obi.,, And Obi himself clearly understood that fact.


It's not Obi that is going to court.
It is THE OBIDIENTS..


So,, what is the Reconciliation Committee bringing to the table for the Obidients.??

garfield1:


Unfortunately,you cannot decide or determine what happened in other collations from your centre.you can only speak for your centre.
I already told you that what was transmitted was stored in the bvas.

Goke7:


The Obedients are just lawless tugs trying to discredit the elections even when they don't have enough reason and evidence to say so and Obi keep messing with their minds to stay relevant despite knowing he did not win.

Now how can either pdp or lp claim to even win an election either of them didn't meet the 25% spread, what's all the fuss about transmission when you don't even have enough number of votes to validate your phantom victory.

If all this is to make the country ungovernable for the eventual winner then we may be talking about something else and not an election that's so visible to all that neither Obi or Atiku won

BluntCrazeMan:


No Wahalla..

BluntCrazeMan:





Oga you're talking trash.



The Obidients went to court quietly..
And they continued remaining quiet while waiting for the outcome of the tribunal.

Even the nonsense protest which the PDP embarked upon, the Obidients didn't join them.


So, which “making the country ungovernable” are you talking about.?.

garfield1:


Wahala go dey.even your lp wanted to access the info on the bvas before inec transfers it to their server.the osun elections has clearly shown that getting info from server is a complicated matter,it is better you get it directly from the bvas.bvas is original, primary unlike the secondary data from server

Goke7:


good, then stop disturbing everywhere with this transmission nonsense and wait for the courts

BluntCrazeMan:
So,, why didn't the INEC allow Peter Obi to get the Original Data from the BVAS.??
Why are they in such a rush to tamper with the BVAS.??
Where exactly are they rushing to.?

Why are they even referring him to the server.,, Rather than the original BVAS Machines themselves.??

garfield1:


This ridiculous. who told you they stopped him? They said they needed to reconfigure the bvas immediately for the guber polls.granting obi access to bvas will delay the polls more than two weeks.

BluntCrazeMan:
Obi will not physically inspect the BVAS Machines..

He will now have to depend on the CTC copies that would be sent to him.

BluntCrazeMan:


Contrary to the previous thread, (2023: Electronic Transmission Of Results Not Mandatory – APC Replies Atiku, Obi),, where the APC maintained that the “Electronic Transmission” of results is not Mandatory, The Electoral Act of 2022 made it very clear that the “VERIFICATION” OF ALL COLLATED RESULTS USING THE “DIRECTLY TRANSMITTED RESULTS” IS HIGHLY MANDATORY..

The APC might argue that the “Transmission” as mentioned inside the Electoral Act could actually mean “Manual transmission”, and not Electronic Transmission, since the word “Electronic Transmission” was not specifically mentioned inside the Electoral Act.

They may also argued that: even though the Electronic Transmission method might be implied or intended in the Electoral Act, that the Electoral Act DIDN'T actually make it MANDATORY, unlike the way it made “Electronic Accreditation” Mandatory.


These are very good arguments indeed.

I am going to throw more lights on these two strong arguments with references from the Electoral Act Alone.

**I will NOT bring in quotes from the INEC’s “Guidelines And Procedures”.

(Meanwhile; “Electronic Transmission” is totally different from the IREV-Portal.. Thus,.. let nobody confuse “Electronically Transmitted Results” with “Photos of the Polling-unit Results that were uploaded to the IREV-Portal”)

I can partly agree with one of the arguments of the APC; that the Two Words “Electronic Transmission” were not phrased together anywhere inside the Electoral Act.
But then, it was definitely implied inside the Act.

And again, if the Electoral Act specified the “Uses” of the so-called “Directly Transmitted Results”, and even gave a penalty (to all the would-be collation officers and the returning officers) for not making proper “Use” of the “Directly Transmitted Results”, then it means that it was also the intention of the Act for the “use” of the “Directly Transmitted Results“ to be Mandatory.


Now, let us take a good look at the Section-64 of the Electoral Act,, starting from Sub-Section-(4)...
After which we can all agree that the “Directly Transmitted Results From The Various Polling-units”, as described inside the Electoral Act, could be anything on this earth, (be it “Optical-Fibre Transmission”, “Solar-Waves Transmission”, “Radio Transmission”, “Sonar Transmission”, and even “Seismic Transmission” too),, but definitely NOT “Manual Transmission”.

Granted that the Electoral Act left the options VERY OPEN for the INEC to independently decide the best methods for the “Direct Transmission of Results”, it doesn't mean that the Electoral Act intended that the whole process of “Direct Transmission of Results" should become OPTIONAL.



Note the word “SHALL”..

The word “SHALL” is used whenever there is strong intention..
It is never used whenever something is supposed to be OPTIONAL..
And again,, this particular Sub-Section-(4) made it mandatory (that is, with the word SHALL) that a collation officer or a returning officer must “VERIFY” his own collated results and make that they are CONSISTENT with the directly transmitted results.

This means that, it is MANDATORY for there to be an already transmitted and collated result, which every Collation Officer and/or every returning officer MUST use to verify his own collations at every collation level..

Therefore, the collation process must not be concluded at any Collation Center, until all the Polling-units that are under its coverage have all “Directly Transmitted Their Results”, and it also means that the “Directly Transmitted Results” are all supposed to be ready for use for the purpose of “Verification”, before the collation process can then be verified and concluded.

In layman’s language, this Sub-Section-(4) is mandating INEC to transmit results directly from the various polling-units -- (without passing through the various collation officers, and in a very quick manner) -- to a separate aggregation and collation centre; and from where these separately collated results MUST be made QUICKLY AVAILABLE to the various collation officers for them to be used for verification purposes at all the collation levels.

That means, INEC is free to do the “direct transmission” in any way it so desires, as far as the requirements for “Verification” as described in the Electoral Act is properly met.
IT ALSO MEANS THAT THIS VERY PROCEDURE MUST NEVER BE DISCARDED.

Thus, if the INEC employed the use of manual transmission for the procedure described by the Electoral Act, it cannot achieve this desired fastness (or quickness).





This Sub-Section-(5) is summarily saying that a returning officer (or a higher collation officer) can overrule the results of lower-level collation officers based on those “Directly Transmitted Results”.



This Sub-Section-(6) made it very clear that apart from the MANDATORY VERIFICATION Purposes, the “Directly Transmitted Results” are also supposed to be used in settling disputes that may arise at collation centers.







This Sub-Section-(9) made it an offence for any collation officer or returning officer to collate and announce a “FALSE RESULT”.

And What Is the “False Result” here supposed to mean.??

a.) Any collated result that was not compulsorily verified as mandated in sub-section-(4) is regarded as a False Result.

b.) For any disputed collated-result which was not settled according to the procedures outlined in Sub-Sections (6, 7, & 8.), then, if the collation officer or returning officer went ahead and announce such a result, it is regarded as a False Result.


AS ALWAYS,, WE WILL STILL WAIT FOR THE JUDGEMENT OF THE SUPREME-COURT JUDGES..
**THEY ARE STILL THE FINAL BUS-STOP TO ALL THESE ARGUMENTS..



___________
___________

yaki84:

All these are bullshits.

There r processes of collation of votes..

From polling units to ward collation centres to local govt collation centres to state collation which is then transmitted to the National collation centre.

All those sub collation centres r captured by inec guidelines in aarticle 8 and it aids in quick and faster mode of collating electoral results from the polling units.

If these results were to be directly sent to IREV, and eventuality occurs, do u know the entire processes would have to be cancelled and restart afresh?
Or like they r still uploading results till now, tht means we wwould have waited till now before knowing the winner or the presidential election.

Every party had agents in all these collation centres, if the result doesnt tally with what INEC declared, then present ur facts in court.

Stop all these shits

garfield1:


Yes.at least he still has access to the requested data.moreover,he can still prove his case via other means