INEC and its guidelines can not be bigger than the Nigerian electoral law.

Every 4 years we keep recycling criminal profs to spearhead our electoral commission...

senatordave1:


You will have to tie all your evidences to a particular unit and show how it affected the results there

Every inec result sheet has a unit number, constituency and local government, like I said before this is computer age and there are camera in every hand, inec can't be altering already signed result sheets and want everyone to keep quiet and take the rubbish they announced.

babajero:
Every inec result sheet has a unit number, constituency and local government, like I said before this is computer age and there are camera in every hand, inec can't be altering already signed result sheets and want everyone to keep quiet and take the rubbish they announced.

The truth is by the time all their evidences are gathered,you will see that it was exaggerated. The results altered might not be up to 100

senatordave1:



The truth is by the time all their evidences are gathered,you will see that it was exaggerated. The results altered might not be up to 100

Till then

BluntCrazeMan:
Till then

States have taken the matter to supreme court

senatordave1:



The truth is by the time all their evidences are gathered,you will see that it was exaggerated. The results altered might not be up to 100

Really? And every region are still saying they didn't vote for APC and tinubu, so who gave him the 8 million votes was it spirit or was it inec? Please which parts of Lagos did he get the 500 and something thousand votes inec allocated to him in Lagos, because I know that louts like you don't even have voters card not talking of voting.

babajero:
Really? And every region are still saying they didn't vote for APC and tinubu, so who gave him the 8 million votes was it spirit or was it inec? Please which parts of Lagos did he get the 500 and something thousand votes inec allocated to him in Lagos, because I know that louts like you don't even have voters card not talking of voting.

It is now resulting to insults childishly? So nw and be voted obi? Obi has been rubbished,the earlier you get over it,the better.kid

senatordave1:


It is now resulting to insults childishly? So nw and be voted obi? Obi has been rubbished,the earlier you get over it,the better.kid

I didn't insult anyone, I only said louts don't have voters card and that is a fact you can go verify.

babajero:
But remember this is 2023 and everyone has a phone, and in every polling unit there was a video recorded.

Yeah makes it easy. But video is not enough, you'll need to access the ballot papers to checkmate the collected votes and thumbprint.
Like I said this is not an easy work!!!

Simeonjoe1:


Yeah makes it easy. But video is not enough, you'll need to access the ballot papers to checkmate the collected votes and thumbprint.
Like I said this is not an easy work!!!

So what about the inec result sheets signed and snapped by almost everyone including the party agents, that was automatically altered by inec. What if let say for instance like ibeju lekki in Lagos where almost everyone videoed the process and accumulated the results, but what inec allocated to tinubu was different from the actual result.

babajero:
So what about the inec result sheets signed and snapped by almost everyone including the party agents, that was automatically altered by inec. What if let say for instance like ibeju lekki in Lagos where almost everyone videoed the process and accumulated the results, but what inec allocated to tinubu was different from the actual result.

That's why you'll need the ballot papers. You check those that thumprinted for LP and other parties. Check those that are Accredited and rule out over voting or inconsistentcy. Now this is subject to manipulation and that's why each party has an agent in every PU to checkmate this and collect their own evidence if at all LP agent are compromised then it'll become more difficult.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCKTR0Zh44A

seunmsg:
The results have been transmitted to irev already so what your point again?

Let's meet in court and decide that one.

Putindbutt:

Cancel the entire votes from Rivets, Obi would still not come second. As long as he will never win SW and North, he can never be President and he knows it too.

They are already in the court..
So, there is no need talking too much.
Let the courts decide.

Voltron007:
Just one question: Since the Act already gave INEC the power to create guidelines for the elections. Is INEC not bound/liable to the guidelines they released to the general public?

They said that INEC is not bounded by it ooo..
But they are not the Court.
So, let the courts decide it properly.

lexy2014:


How will it be easier to doctor uploaded results?

Who is doing the doctoring?

Na INEC staff Themselves...
They had actually doctored lots of uploaded photos of the original results, by either deleting them and leaving them blank, or by deleting them and replacing them with another result-sheet photo.

Amperes:
trans·mit
[tranzˈmɪt, trɑːnzˈmɪt, transˈmɪt, trɑːnsˈmɪt]
VERB
cause (something) to pass on from one person or place to another:
"knowledge is transmitted from teacher to pupil" · "sexually transmitted diseases"
SIMILAR:
transfer
pass on
hand on
communicate
convey
impart

communicate or be a medium for (an idea or emotion):
"the theatrical gift of being able to transmit emotion"
broadcast or send out (an electrical signal or a radio or television programme):
"the programme was transmitted on 7 October"

DIRECT TRANSMISSION: In direct transmission, an infectious agent is transferred from a reservoir to a susceptible host by direct contact or droplet spread. Direct contact occurs through skin-to-skin contact, kissing, and sexual intercourse. Direct contact also refers to contact with soil or vegetation harboring infectious organisms.

As you can see, direct transmission means sending directly from the polling unit without physically moving to the collation centre. in fact in the guidelines, the collation officer is supposed to confirm that the results have been uploaded, confirm that the physical copy he is holding is the same with the one on the portal before commencing collation.

The people we are arguing with here are trying to maintain that the guidelines is useless..
That the Electoral Act is the only authentic document to be used to decide this issue of “Electronic Transmission being specified by the Law”...
(Even though they failed to understand that the Guidelines is also a part of what made the whole Electoral LEGAL FRAMEWORK to be complete -- but let us still toe their line of argument)

So, we are trying to still give them the benefit of the doubts by not mentioning the guidelines,, but by proving it directly to them using the Electoral Act alone..

We are trying to still show them that the Electoral Act itself (even though it wasn't so specific in the use of the words that described “Transmission”) still intended that the phrase “Transmitted directly from the Polling-units” doesn't mean that the results would be carried to the collation centres..

Rather, the Electoral Act intends that these particularly transmitted results are transmitted in a very fast means to the “Headquarters” where they were quickly categorised and collated as quickly as possible -- and which would be totally different and independent from all the collations that were done at the various collation centers.

In essence, these quickly transmitted and collated results can be used to cross-check and verify the results that were being collated at the various collation centres (according to the Electoral Act), and also to settle the disputes at the various collation centres..

Thus, the words of the Electoral Act indicated that the Law expected the Transmitted Results to be faster, and that the collation from such “Quickly Transmitted Results” must had been fully completed even before the time the physical collation at the collation centres might have started.

Thus, the Electoral Act expected the physical collations to be slower, and expected the Transmitted Results to be way way faster.

SirJerrie:


Make I break am down small



And some wide-mouth proud MFOS said the election was free and fair
Even blind man SAW WHAT HAPPENED!

You're very correct..



The condition is very clear.
“.. if a collated result at his or a lower level of collation is not correct. ..”

Q: And then, how can we arrive at the conclusion that “the collation is not correct”.??

A: It is when the disputes raised at the collection center cannot be sorted out by using only the results that were brought in by the officers from the lower level of collation..

Thus, in this election,, they didn't do the needful, as required by the Electoral Act itself., and thus, it made the settling of disputes (as required by the Electoral Act) to be very difficult.

OloyeVIII:

Two adults are taking time to educate the public, you are here displaying your ancestral stupidity. You will die soon.

Don't mind him bro..


“Nigeria” happened to him.
I hope the New Nigeria heals him fast enough.

senatordave1:


Not true.electronic transmission isn't constitutional

Let's wait for the court to decide this particular issue..

GerogeI:

You cannot transmit a record directly from the polling unit in a manual form, to do so means to go from your polling unit to INEC register in Abuja for submission. So transmission, qualified by "directly form polling unit" intrinsically excludes any form of manual delivery by paper.

You understood the argument very well..

yaki84:

Lets be clear on this term Transmission..

Transmitting manually and electronically is the same if and oonly if what is transmitted doesnt lose value and is in its original form.
On this context there was glitch with the bvas during transmission of the presidential result, which made inec to resort manual transmission of result from the PU to ward collation centres to the local govt collation centres to the state centres before it was transmitted to the national collation centre.

Did this process even though bulky and cumbersome, did it change the original form of these results in the PUs?

If it did, what did the agents of these parties do to address this?
If they haveenough evidence, u seek legal redress than saying the entire process should be cancel

We are trying to establish the fact that the Electoral Act itself (even though it wasn't so specific in the use of the words that described “Transmission”) still intended that the phrase “Transmitted directly from the Polling-units” doesn't mean that the results would be carried to the various levels of collation centres..

Rather, the Electoral Act intends that these particularly transmitted results are transmitted in a very fast means to the “Headquarters” where they were quickly categorised and collated as quickly as possible -- and which would be totally different and independent from all the collations that were done at the various collation centers.

In essence, these quickly transmitted and collated results can be used to cross-check and verify the results that were being collated at the various collation centres (according to the Electoral Act), and also to settle the disputes at the various collation centres..

Thus, the words of the Electoral Act indicated that the Law expected the Transmitted Results to be faster, and that the collation from such “Quickly Transmitted Results” must had been fully completed even before the time the physical collation at the collation centres might have started.

Thus, the Electoral Act expected the physical collations to be slower, and expected the Transmitted Results to be way way faster.


...
About the issue of calling for the cancellation..

Dino Melaye was expecting the INEC-Chairman to apply the Section-64(5) of the Electoral Act..
That is, About settling of disputes..
But the INEC-Chairman didn't follow the rules of the Electoral Act..
Thus the PDP called for the cancellation of the whole process,, since they couldn't obey the rules of the Electoral Act..

EXPRESSSMAN:


The Electoral Act from all indications implies two results, one transmitted from the polling unit and the other collated by the Returning officer. Such that one could be used for verification when announcing the result. The question is, did INEC have two results for verification whether transmitted manually or electronically?

THEY DIDN'T.

There was no transmission as required by the electoral act.

It was just a one-way result which the electoral act is against.
This is the crux of the matter.

Thank you once again..




You just closed the case properly.

felixawe:


What's transmit meant by INEC. Inec need not use ambiguous word.

The Electoral Act didn't describe the words “Transmit” or “Transmitted” or “Transmission”..
Thus,, the meanings of these words are to be deducted from the ways they were used inside the Act.

senatordave1:


Not true.results were actually transmitted but not all

The Act didn't tell the Commission to transmit some and abandon some.

emmnprince:


This thread isn't stupid. It is informative. At least I have picked "one or two" things from what OP explained with quotes and from various commentators.

Thanks for the compliments..

0monnak0da:
The point is what remedy should the court give
Is none transmission enough to cancel the results and trigger another election?
Would those shouting about it say different it the results favoured them?
I have no doubt if Obi had won Tinubu would be saying the same thing

RIGHT FROM THE EVENING OF THE ELECTION DAY,,, EVEN BEFORE THE COLLATIONS STARTED.....

THAT WAS WHEN THEY STARTED SHOUTING..!!


THE RESULTS HAD NOT STARTED FAVOURING ANYBODY YET..
BUT THEY HAVE ALREADY STARTED SHOUTING ON INEC TO DO THE RIGHT THING...


SO, DON'T GO THERE.!!

DON'T DROP BIASED COMMENTS HERE..

senatordave1:


It is simple.transmission can be manual or electronic.not transmitting it electronically does not invalidate the result. Non transmission invalidates the results

The Courts will decide..
At least, the court decisions will set the required precedence for all future elections.

149. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Act, any defect or error arising from any actions taken by an official of the Commission in relation to any notice, form or document made or given or other things done by the official in pursuance of the provisions of the Constitution or of this Act, or any rules made thereunder remain valid, UNLESS OTHERWISE CHALLENGED AND DECLARED INVALID BY A COMPETENT COURT OF LAW OR TRIBUNAL.[/quote]

Does the court have the right to make judgement that negate the constitution?

No need to break head, the Supreme Court will do the needful.

BluntCrazeMan:



RIGHT FROM THE EVENING OF THE ELECTION DAY,,, EVEN BEFORE THE COLLATIONS STARTED.....

THAT WAS WHEN THEY STARTED SHOUTING..!!


THE RESULTS HAD NOT STARTED FAVOURING ANYBODY YET..
BUT THEY HAVE ALREADY STARTED SHOUTING ON INEC TO DO THE RIGHT THING...


SO, DON'T GO THERE.!!

DON'T DROP BIASED COMMENTS HERE..

Why are you typing in capital s?
When a person quotes me typing in capital, I automatically assume it is a lunatic and I don't bother reading