tinsel:

Why are you not asleep yourself?

Because we want to be following what's happening, that's why

Ofunaofu:
These are beer parlour analysis, we are yet to get the CTC of the judgement


Are you aware of what is called emerging new facts

INEC is bound by the Electoral law and it's election guidelines to transmit results electronically. The INEC chairman made that point clear severally at different foras that the results of the 2023 general election, i.e polling units results will be transmitted electronically to the IREV real time on the election day

You haven't said anything as far as I'm concerned. What INEC chairman said is different from what the law said. The worst that can happen is to jail the INEC chairman for misleading Nigerians but that cannot and will not take away the efficacy of the law. That's why I'm so happy that LP is not basing their allegations of mode of transmission alone. The count charges are many

Jkilo:

You haven't said anything as far as I'm concerned. [b]What INEC chairman said is different from what the law said. [/b]The worst that can happen is to jail the INEC chairman for misleading Nigerians but that cannot and will not take away the efficacy of the law. That's why I'm so happy that LP is not basing their allegations of mode of transmission alone. The count charges are many

At the bolded, then Tinubu should stop parading himself as president elect because INEC chairman said So. He should wait until the court pronounced him winner before he becomes president

seunmsg:


What’s the process of transmitting results and accreditation data?

sorry I didnt see your reply. if you look at the second sentence I made I alluded to the possibility of deliberate poor case presentation in order to arrive at the judgement in question. you know a judge does not go to seek facts himself but rules based on the evidence/case presented. I believe it was done in a shabby manner in order to procure that judgement and try to use it as precedence for future cases. however the fact still remains that INEC declared their guidelines prior to the elections and adhered to these guidelines for elections held on the same day as the contentious presidential elections. it is going to be difficult to convince judges that all machines, operators and network failed all over the country at the same time when there is probably expert and incontestable evidence to the contrary. you know electronic manipulation always leaves a trail so it can be followed and the culprits identified. mark my words the evidence that will be presented in this case even Oyetola can use it to fight his own battle if he so desires.

garfield1:


Yes transmit results but not in realtime and not necessarily electronic

Result is different from accredited voters. No law mandates INEC to transmit accredited voters in real time-thats what the judgement stated, but the electoral act mandates INEC to transmit results from PUs in real time. That's why nigeria spent billions on BVAS and IREV

HNICEARTH:


Result is different from accredited voters. No law mandates INEC to transmit accredited voters in real time-thats what the judgement stated, but the electoral act mandates INEC to transmit results from PUs in real time. That's why nigeria spent billions on BVAS and IREV

Which part of the electoral act mandates electronic transmission? Mind you bvas is for accreditation primarily while irev came out in2020

garfield1:


Which part of the electoral act mandates electronic transmission? Mind you bvas is for accreditation primarily while irev came out in2020

Section 64 (5). Electoral act as amended was signed into law in 2022, so it captures the function of BVAS and IREV.

HNICEARTH:


Section 64 (5). Electoral act as amended was signed into law in 2022, so it captures the function of BVAS and IREV.

I just read the electoral act.it captures bvas directly but says nothing about irev.section64(5) it says a collation officer in times of dispute will use the record of transmitted accreditation and results to collate once there is confusion or dispute about results.now the supreme court this week said transmission of accreditation is not mandatory.this will apply tp results too

garfield1:


I just read the electoral act.it captures bvas directly but says nothing about irev.section64(5) it says a collation officer in times of dispute will use the record of transmitted accreditation and results to collate once there is confusion or dispute about results.now the supreme court this week said transmission of accreditation is not mandatory.this will apply tp results too

Nope! Not necessarily when there is dispute. Check subsection 4 (a) and (b). Moreover, ruling on accreditation cannot apply to ruling on results because they are different subjects and serve different purposes.

For full functions of BVAS and IREV, check clause 38 in the 2022 INEC regulations and guidelines on 2023 elections ;

INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct
of Elections, 2022
Section 38.--On 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

(ii) Use the BVAS to upload a scanned copy of the
EC8A to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), as
prescribed by the Commission.

(iii) Take the BVAS and the original copy of each
of the forms in tamperevident envelope to the
Registration Area/Ward Collation Officer, in the
company of Security Agents. The Polling Agents
may accompany the Presiding Officer to the RA/
Ward Collation Centre.

HNICEARTH:


Nope! Not necessarily when there is dispute. Check subsection 4 (a) and (b). Moreover, ruling on accreditation cannot apply to ruling on results because they are different subjects and serve different purposes.

For full functions of BVAS and IREV, check clause 38 in the 2022 INEC regulations and guidelines on 2023 elections ;

INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct
of Elections, 2022
Section 38.--On 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

(ii) Use the BVAS to upload a scanned copy of the
EC8A to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), as
prescribed by the Commission.

(iii) Take the BVAS and the original copy of each
of the forms in tamperevident envelope to the
Registration Area/Ward Collation Officer, in the
company of Security Agents. The Polling Agents
may accompany the Presiding Officer to the RA/
Ward Collation Centre.

You are missing something.inec guidelines are not laws.they are just guidelines and merely administrative.what matters is the electoral act.the electoral act in section 47 says accredited votes must be transmitted while section 60 says results must be transmitted.now, transmission could be manual or electronic.the electoral act left it at the discretion of inec.it is only the guideline which used electronic not electoral act.
Now,the court has stated that it is not Mandatory to transmit accredited votes electronically despite what section 47 states.it means section 60 affecting results too is also affected once the issue comes up and inec guidelines are not laws.the electoral act only made electronic accreditation compulsory,nothing else electronic is compulsory

Empty

OGHENAOGIE:
you are obviously very foolish who rigged them?? How does uploading results affect manual collation of results... You obidients are the worst set of supported illogical and highly sentimental... So how come Lagos wasn't rigged then Abuja wasn't rigged to so that LP won't win... Katsina yobe kaduna gombe weren't rigged for APC to win to u see how illogical ur argument sounds... But since it makes u guys happy hold on to it... If u guys want APC defeated tell Obi and kwankwanso to return to PDP otherwise LP NNPP ll only aid APC to win while PDP the only Party capable of beating APC for president ll come second while other Regional parties like NNPP LP ll come behind PDP...

garfield1:



You are missing something.inec guidelines are not laws.they are just guidelines and merely administrative.what matters is the electoral act.the electoral act in section 47 says accredited votes must be transmitted while section 60 says results must be transmitted.now, transmission could be manual or electronic.the electoral act left it at the discretion of inec.it is only the guideline which used electronic not electoral act.
Now,the court has stated that it is not Mandatory to transmit accredited votes electronically despite what section 47 states.it means section 60 affecting results too is also affected once the issue comes up and inec guidelines are not laws.the electoral act only made electronic accreditation compulsory,nothing else electronic is compulsory

No! You are the one missing something. INEC guidelines are not just mere administrative jargons. They are actually backed by the constitution and the electoral ACT. The constitution and electoral act gave the commission the powers to setup guidelines for conduct of elections.
These guidelines are secondary to the electoral act, same way the electoral act is secondary to the constitution. Saying they are mere administrative, is like saying INEC conducting election is just a mere voting exercise.
The guidelines and regulation are a fulfillment of the constitution and electoral act, same way with elections.
You cant conduct elections without the guidelines.

The electoral ACT tends to be specific where the constitutions is ambigous about the commission. While the guidelines and regulations will also be specific where the electoral act is ambigous on matters of elections

HNICEARTH:


No! You are the one missing something. INEC guidelines are not just mere administrative jargons. They are actually backed by the constitution and the electoral ACT. The constitution and electoral act gave the commission the powers to setup guidelines for conduct of elections.
These guidelines are secondary to the electoral act, same way the electoral act is secondary to the constitution. Saying they are mere administrative, is like saying INEC conducting election is just a mere voting exercise.
The guidelines and regulation are a fulfillment of the constitution and electoral act, same way with elections.
You cant conduct elections without the guidelines.

The electoral ACT tends to be specific where the constitutions is ambigous about the commission. While the guidelines and regulations will also be specific where the electoral act is ambigous on matters of elections

You are still missing it.the electoral guidelines stated that accredited votes and results must be transmitted electronically but the supreme court said it is not mandatory.the supreme court in wike vs dakuku clearly stated that while guidelines are legal,it cannot be a ground to void elections.justice nweze said violation of guidelines is not fatal but violation of electoral act is fatal.finally,section 138 of the electoral act states that any violation of inec directives or guidelines which is not contrary to the electoral act cannot nullify any polls.I believe we are done.this part of obi and atiku Prayers are dead alongside the drug charge,shettima Nomination.what is left is the fct conundrum

garfield1:


You are still missing it.the electoral guidelines stated that accredited votes and results must be transmitted electronically but the supreme court said it is not mandatory.the supreme court in wike vs dakuku clearly stated that while guidelines are legal,it cannot be a ground to void elections.justice nweze said violation of guidelines is not fatal but violation of electoral act is fatal.finally,section 138 of the electoral act states that any violation of inec directives or guidelines which is not contrary to the electoral act cannot nullify any polls.I believe we are done.this part of obi and atiku Prayers are dead alongside the drug charge,shettima Nomination.what is left is the fct conundrum

Nowhere the supreme court STATED that transmission of result is not mandatory. The supreme court ruled that transmission of accredited voters is not mandatory. There was no ruling on transmission of results. You cant just conclude using the ruling of the supreme court on accredited voters as a yard stick for transmission of result as these are 2 different subject matters and serve different purposes. Every take I have dropped has bn backed by either the constitution, the electoral act or INEC guidelines, while all these while you've bn merely speculating.

The electoral act was explicit about transmission of result but ambigous about the mode of transmission. same act gave INEC the powers to state clearly via guidelines the mode of transmission. The only time the guidelines can be void is when it contravenes the provisions of the electoral act. As such, on this issue of transmission, the guidelines never contradicted the electoral ACT, rather it clarifies the ambiguity in the ACT. KAPISH!

HNICEARTH:


Nowhere the supreme court STATED that transmission of result is not mandatory. The supreme court ruled that transmission of accredited voters is not mandatory. There was no ruling on transmission of results. You cant just conclude using the ruling of the supreme court on accredited voters as a yard stick for transmission of result as these are 2 different subject matters and serve different purposes. Every take I have dropped has bn backed by either the constitution, the electoral act or INEC guidelines, while all these while you've bn merely speculating.

The electoral act was explicit about transmission of result but ambigous about the mode of transmission. same act gave INEC the powers to state clearly via guidelines the mode of transmission. The only time the guidelines can be void is when it contravenes the provisions of the electoral act. As such, on this issue of transmission, the guidelines never contradicted the electoral ACT, rather it clarifies the ambiguity in the ACT. KAPISH!

It seems I am wasting my time with you.the electoral act was ambiguous about both tranamission for accreditation and results.section 47 says accredited votes should be transmitted.section 60 says results should be transmitted.it never specified whether manual or otherwise.section 64 specified that transmission should be left to the discretion of inec.no mention of electronic was made.How do you even reason? Obidients know zilch about law and politics and they are not aware.you even claimed you quoted electoral act and constitution.remind me which sections you quoted again.rubbish.I on the other hand has referred you to specific sections of the law and even cited specific case laws.I even told you that section 138 of the electoral act has settled everything,you are here making noise and blabing like adaobi.I have told you that the apex court have ruled that violation of guidelines cannot void any polls.take note that violation of electoral act also cannot just void any polls except it is substantial and obi must show that it would have made him winner..

In any case,the supreme court stated in osun that when proving ones cases,primary or firsthand evidence are needed and primary evidences include bvas,voters register,result sheets.data transmitted from bvas are secondary evidences and will not help you.tell adaobi to bring bvas and form ec8a.leaning on mundane issues like amazon cloud,inec server will give him hbp

garfield1:


It seems I am wasting my time with you.the electoral act was ambiguous about both tranamission for accreditation and results.section 47 says accredited votes should be transmitted.section 60 says results should be transmitted.it never specified whether manual or otherwise.section 64 specified that transmission should be left to the discretion of inec.no mention of electronic was made.How do you even reason? Obidients know zilch about law and politics and they are not aware.you even claimed you quoted electoral act and constitution.remind me which sections you quoted again.rubbish.I on the other hand has referred you to specific sections of the law and even cited specific case laws.I even told you that section 138 of the electoral act has settled everything,you are here making noise and blabing like adaobi.I have told you that the apex court have ruled that violation of guidelines cannot void any polls.take note that violation of electoral act also cannot just void any polls except it is substantial and obi must show that it would have made him winner..

In any case,the supreme court stated in osun that when proving ones cases,primary or firsthand evidence are needed and primary evidences include bvas,voters register,result sheets.data transmitted from bvas are secondary evidences and will not help you.tell adaobi to bring bvas and form ec8a.leaning on mundane issues like amazon cloud,inec server will give him hbp

Wasting time is robbing oneself.
Don’t waste your time typing: seems you only type what you want to hear.

HNICEARTH:


Wasting time is robbing oneself.
Don’t waste your time typing: seems you only type what you want to hear.

The only thing compulsory according to the electoral act is electronic accreditation.all others are discretionary.obi will fail woefully.

Wahala wahala

MadamExcellency:


Why did you jump the following emphasis by the Apex Court as stated below?

The BVAS, INEC voter register or form EC8A showing the number of votes cast at each polling unit are the only admissible evidence that can be used to ascertain over-voting.

The Labour Party and PDP petitions are centered on BVAS not IREV.

Secondly, BVAS exposes Over voting while IREV exposes votes manipulation and reassignment and APC didn't contest vote reassignment as in the case with LabourParty petition

It is your responsibility to make yourself happy.