BluntCrazeMan:
There were two BVAS Server Reports,, and one BVAS Direct-Inspection Report...

The BVAS Inspection Report was used because it was regarded as the “Most Authentic” of all the reports, being that it was generated by the direct inspection of the BVAS Machines..

That didn't really mean that the BVAS Reports were irrelevant..

But since a superior evidence existed,, then it supercedes the rest of all the other evidence.

Hmmm. Are you sure that's how they see it. I hope it's the case o

DoctorAyukebot:


Even a son is expected to say thank you when he gets a piece of bread from his mother that is dued him. It is called manners.

So this is case, who is the mother, who is the son

Caseless:
Did you read to understand i'm trying to talk about "rabble-rousery" in terms of his over-talking and little action? Have you not heard he's not going to court?

Not going to court does not make him a rabblerouser. He clearly said he does not believe in the courts and it's already happening. Till now the legal team don't have access to the election materials and once they can't frontload all their petition and witness statement the case is good as dead from start. At least that's the judicial precedence on ground

Kukutenla:

Hmmm. Are you sure that's how they see it. I hope it's the case o

That was what happened in Osun.

Now,, no other parties had presented BVAS-Reports since after that (as far as I am aware), apart from Enugu’s LP Candidate in the governorship election.

But in Enugu’s Case,, the judges said that it was a subpoenaed witness who brought the document,, and they overruled the documents,, and didn't even look at it in the first place.
(They ruled that subpoenas are not acceptable,, including the NYSC subpoenaed witness too)

So, now that the BVAS reports are going to be filed together with the petitions in the three states,, let's see how it is going to turn out..

Caseless:
what was the superior evidence?

Read the comment you quoted again.
The answer is inside it.

BluntCrazeMan:


This can only be true when there is Inspection Report of the Direct-Inspection of the BVAS-Machines that counters the content of the BVAS-Report.

That's what will happen.again,they must produce the voter register

BluntCrazeMan:
That was what happened in Osun.

Now,, no other parties had presented BVAS-Reports since after that (as far as I am aware), apart from Enugu’s LP Candidate in the governorship election.

But in Enugu’s Case,, the judges said that it was a subpoenaed witness who brought the document,, and they overruled the documents,, and didn't even look at it in the first place.
(They ruled that subpoenas are not acceptable,, including the NYSC subpoenaed witness too)

So, now that the BVAS reports are going to be filed together with the petitions in the three states,, let's see how it is going to turn out..

Why will a court discount subpoenaed witness
Are such witnesses not more credible

I will just advise the three litigants to stay away from the bvas reports. INEC will bring another report to contradict that one and they'll be back to square one
Better they inspect the BVAS and submit the report from there

Kukutenla:

Why will a court discount subpoenaed witness
Are such witnesses not more credible

I will just advise the three litigants to stay away from the bvas reports.

INEC will bring another report to contradict that one and they'll be back to square one.

Better they inspect the BVAS and submit the report from there

The emboldened is exactly what the parties wanted the INEC to do.
Let them do the BVAS-inspection..

INEC is blatantly refusing the court order for the direct inspection of the BVAS-machines..

Therefore, the parties are submitting both the BVAS-Server-Reports and the IREV-Accreditation Report.

In this situation,, INEC will have no option than to agree to the court order that mandated them to do the inspection.

Otherwise,, the submitted reports would be used as evidence.

As for the Subpoenaed witnesses,, the Electoral-Act was so silent about that.
So, the counsels relied on “Court Processes”..
But the Judges ruled that Election Litigation is different from normal court process, and relies on the Electoral Act.

So, since the Electoral-Act didn't say anything about Subpoena, there is no need introducing it under any guise

garfield1:


That's what will happen.again,they must produce the voter register

Remember that “Electronic Register” was used,, and this electronic register was pre-loaded inside the BVAS-machines..
Manual printed hard-copy registers were not used.

So, for the register which was used at the election to be produced,, then the BVAS Machines has to be produced.

The INEC we know wouldn't want to do any inspection of the BVAS this time around., nor would they want to bring the BVAS Machines to the tribunal.

BluntCrazeMan:


The emboldened is exactly what the parties wanted the INEC to do.
Let them do the BVAS-inspection..

INEC is blatantly refusing the court order for the direct inspection of the BVAS-machines..

Therefore, the parties are submitting both the BVAS-Server-Reports and the IREV-Accreditation Report.

In this situation,, INEC will have no option than to agree to the court order that mandated them to do the inspection.

Otherwise,, the submitted reports would be used as evidence.

As for the Subpoenaed witnesses,, the Electoral-Act was so silent about that.
So, the counsels relied on “Court Processes”..
But the Judges ruled that Election Litigation is different from normal court process, and relies on the Electoral Act.

So, since the Electoral-Act didn't say anything about Subpoena, there is no need introducing it under any guise

If INEC is refusing the court order, the parties should report back to the court as well so at least it forms part of the records. INEC cannot be giving APC all required documents including party register in record time only to turn around and become clueless when the time reach for other parties.

The EA actually recognises subpoenaed witnesses. It is the courts that deliberately turn a blind eye to it. I shared a screenshot of that provision before. Also paragraph 6 of EA also allows normal court procedure of FHC in civil proceedings to hold for election tribunal. I think the whole idea of discountenancing subpoenaed witness is deliberately because it favors the opposition parties. The courts are proving to be pro-APC

Kukutenla:

If INEC is refusing the court order, the parties should report back to the court as well so at least it forms part of the records.

In Enugu,, the INEC gave the flimsy excuse that PDP said that the inspection should not go on.
The LP reported back to the court.
And it was not even mentioned of the Judgement..
So, it is a case where you don't even trust the judges to do the right things at the right time.

INEC cannot be giving APC all required documents including party register in record time only to turn around and become clueless when the time reach for other parties.

In such cases of gross-misconduct/unhidden-bias,, the existing Nigerian Laws/Codes of practice didn't really specify the penalties for such misconducts.

The EA actually recognises subpoenaed witnesses. It is the courts that deliberately turn a blind eye to it. I shared a screenshot of that provision before. Also paragraph 6 of EA also allows normal court procedure of FHC in civil proceedings to hold for election tribunal. I think the whole idea of discountenancing subpoenaed witness is deliberately because it favors the opposition parties. The courts are proving to be pro-APC

The parties are approaching the tribunals this time,, bearing in mind that the judges are biased..
Thus,, every possible evidence should be provided..
No need waiting for only the INEC to produce the CTCs of the authentic evidence, which they would possibly withhold and/or delay.

Let the defendants now be the ones that are being left with no other choices than to produce the supposed authentic evidence in order to defend themselves.

That's what the EA says about the presentation of evidence.

BluntCrazeMan:
Remember that “Electronic Register” was used,, and this electronic register was pre-loaded inside the BVAS-machines..
Manual printed hard-copy registers were not used.

So, for the register which was used at the election to be produced,, then the BVAS Machines has to be produced.

The INEC we know wouldn't want to do any inspection of the BVAS this time around., nor would they want to bring the BVAS Machines to the tribunal.

That's why the bvas must be presented so it's a waste

garfield1:


That's why the bvas must be presented so it's a waste

Let me not respond deeply to this.

Just know that the person who has the BVAS is the person who MUST present it.

BluntCrazeMan:
In Enugu,, the INEC gave the flimsy excuse that PDP said that the inspection should not go on.
The LP reported back to the court.
And it was not even mentioned of the Judgement..
So, it is a case where you don't even trust the judges to do the right things at the right time.



In such cases of gross-misconduct/unhidden-bias,, the existing Nigerian Laws/Codes of practice didn't really specify the penalties for such misconducts.





The parties are approaching the tribunals this time,, bearing in mind that the judges are biased..
Thus,, every possible evidence should be provided..
No need waiting for only the INEC to produce the CTCs of the authentic evidence, which they would possibly withhold and/or delay.

Let the defendants now be the ones that are being left with no other choices than to produce the supposed authentic evidence in order to defend themselves.

That's what the EA says about the presentation of evidence.

It's a sad reality that INEC can be so brazenly partisan. And the courts too.

But if the judges are biased, I wonder how they intend to get anything out of the process. There'll always be shortcomings to point to and if nothing, new ones manufactured

Kukutenla:

It's a sad reality that INEC can be so brazenly partisan. And the courts too.

But if the judges are biased, I wonder how they intend to get anything out of the process. There'll always be shortcomings to point to and if nothing, new ones manufactured

Judges misconducts and biased judgements can only be reported as a complaint at the NJC.
The judge would be reprimanded or penalized.

But the judgement remains.

The judgement can only be reviewed if the the probing panel discovered that it was so brazenly flawed.

BluntCrazeMan:
Let me not respond deeply to this.

Just know that the person who has the BVAS is the person who MUST present it.

True but you know it will not be presented.highest only a few will be presented.after presenting,you must also demonstrate it.

garfield1:


True but you know it will not be presented.highest only a few will be presented.after presenting,you must also demonstrate it.

And now..
I won't respond to you on this at-all.

BluntCrazeMan:


And now..
I won't respond to you on this at-all.

Just forget about the kogi and imo polls,that's all.focus more on bayelsa or ondo or imo next year...I'll have added 2027 but ofcourse tinubu will still win so 2031 is better

garfield1:


Just forget about the kogi and imo polls,that's all.focus more on bayelsa or ondo or imo next year...I'll have added 2027 but ofcourse tinubu will still win so 2031 is better

My last response still stands.

You're focusing on winning and who wins.

I'm looking at the systems.


So, I don't have any response for you

BluntCrazeMan:
My last response still stands.

You're focusing on winning and who wins.

I'm looking at the systems.


So, I don't have any response for you

Gradually,we are getting there.years ago it was manual,now it is semi electronic.rigging incidences are gradually reducing

garfield1:


Gradually,we are getting there.years ago it was manual,now it is semi electronic.rigging incidences are gradually reducing

Okk