IamV:


You're talking in respect to the video contained in the drive ?

There's no law that state that the petitioners must serve the respondents the video first before it's played in court .

Justice Tsammani made it clear that the only reason the video won't be played yesterday was due to time constraint,not because of the objection the respondents raised.

Your propaganda of LP party "smuggling cases" without serving the respondents is dead on arrival .

leave that olodo boss. Its almost 2pm pls create todays thread

saintbillion:
leave that olodo boss. Its almost 2pm pls create todays thread

Good afternoon everyone, here's the link to today's proceedings,10 June,2023 .

https://www.nairaland.com/7722465/peter-obi-vs-tinubu-9th#123700160

You're all welcome.

Jackiedemie:

There's no law that backed electronic transmission of result. The guidelines can be changed at anytime depending on the circumstances the commission found themselves. For instances, election timetable is one of the guidelines and its can be changed anytime the commission find it fit to do so

You guys should stop saying what you don't know, section 64 specifically mandated PO to transmit results.
"Section 64 (6)(a) refers to a hard copy of the results as collated while Section 64 (6)(d) talks about the electronically transmitted version of the results? Even sections 64 (4)&(5) direct that the manual version (original hard copy of the results) must be compared with the results transmitted DIRECTLY FROM THE POLLING UNITS. Hence the Act clearly envisages a DUAL collation mode.

That is why INEC assured on 26 February 2023, after it had failed to comply with the law, that “These results cannot be tampered with and any discrepancy between THEM and the PHYSICAL RESULTS used in collation will be thoroughly investigated and remediated, in line with Section 65 of the Electoral Act 2022″. Please, see: “#NigeriaElections2023: INEC Speaks On Why Result Viewing Portal (IReV) Is Not Working, Blames Technical Hitches For Challenges”. Do you agree that the “them” mentioned by INEC refers to the results e-transmitted directly from polling units to the iReV/portal/server on election day, as separate from the “physical results”?

You can get the details from here:
https://lawpavilion.com/blog/fifteen-critical-questions-towards-determining-whether-results-e-transmitted-directly-from-polling-units-are-not-a-mandatory-part-of-the-collation-process-under-the-electoral-act-2022/#:~:text=Thus%2C%20the%20Electoral%20Act%202022,the%20polling%20units%20(iii).

Mr. Man, no umpire changes rule at the middle of the game. Yes, rule can be changed before the start of an event but not when an event as began. Any one that does that had engaged in malpractice and no fairness again.

garfield1:


Their testimony will go nowhere as only a handful of witness will be called and it will affect only those polling units they operated from.in any case,inec will bring adhoc staffs to counter them

Some are just very senseless, no issue with uploading of presidential in my polling unit. I was able to view it that evening, and I compared it with my result

IfnobeGod20:

All this rigmaroling is not what I asked for. Youre trying to play smart. Who is talking about accredited data here? We are talking of polling units results as captured by law, you're playing smart of misleading people like you with accredited data . Please quote the portion of the judgement between Oyetola vs Adeleke that says, INEC guideline cannot be used to void an election, very simple word. I think the judgement is on the net and I want you to shame the devil and quote that portion where the supreme court justices say so.
Let me give you this quick correction. Any guideline that is not point of law by INEC cannot be used to void an election, that is sure but any guideline that is captured by law, it's a law on itself. I know you didn't read the content on the link I posted, I will repost it again but I do believe you will take time and seat down and read it with open mind.
https://www.premiumtimesng.com/opinion/589746-inec-electronic-transmission-of-results-electoral-act-and-matters-arising-by-wahab-shittu.html

"The 2022 Electoral Act EXPRESSLY provides for (to quote the Act verbatim) “the votes and results of the election recorded and TRANSMITTED DIRECTLY from polling units” See section 64 (4)-(. Thus, the Electoral Act 2022 MAKES IT MANDATORY that, upon conclusion of voting at the polling units and filling/recording and signing of Form EC8A by relevant persons, the election results (i). Must be electronically transmitted (ii). DIRECTLY from the polling units (iii). On election day (iv) before the Polling Unit Officer and his team would take the hardcopy of Form EC8A to the Collation centre? Dual collation procedure! Do you not agree?

9. Are you not aware that Section 64 (6)(a) refers to a hard copy of the results as collated while Section 64 (6)(d) talks about the electronically transmitted version of the results? Even sections 64 (4)&(5) direct that the manual version (original hard copy of the results) must be compared with the results transmitted DIRECTLY FROM THE POLLING UNITS. Hence the Act clearly envisages a DUAL collation mode but Alhaji Mahmoud Yakubu only did the manual own".

The above excerpt was taken from this link below:

https://lawpavilion.com/blog/fifteen-critical-questions-towards-determining-whether-results-e-transmitted-directly-from-polling-units-are-not-a-mandatory-part-of-the-collation-process-under-the-electoral-act-2022/#:~:text=Thus%2C%20the%20Electoral%20Act%202022,the%20polling%20units%20(iii).

Just I have said, say what you know and stop saying what you don't know because you're confusing the unsuspecting people that cannot read except they are spoon fed.

So if they should go by your analysis, it may take them months to announce winner in a any election. What was in d act is that results will b transmitted electronically, no law said they must wait for the online own to collate or declare results

If labour party are serious and sure they won majority votes, they should focus on areas they were robbed instead of this stupid claim on Electoral act and playing of videos.
They can't win inec on that and no judge will rule in favor of lp on that matter as Nigeria situation is concern. They should prove if they won or not. They want inec to cancel election they are claiming they won. Nonsense.

Geopex:


So if they should go by your analysis, it may take them months to announce winner in a any election. What was in d act is that results will b transmitted electronically, no law said they must wait for the online own to collate or declare results

You're the one saying that. Do you know that collation of some states governorship elections takes up to three to four days. Come to think of it, no law specify the limit to the number of days to collate results. Which is best, taking almost a month to collate results and get the best or do it for few days and full of errors?
Are you aware that the electoral Act even stipulates that after announcement of results, before 7 days INEC can review the results announced? That is how flexible our electoral law has become.

IfnobeGod20:

You guys should stop saying what you don't know, section 64 specifically mandated PO to transmit results.
"Section 64 (6)(a) refers to a hard copy of the results as collated while Section 64 (6)(d) talks about the electronically transmitted version of the results? Even sections 64 (4)&(5) direct that the manual version (original hard copy of the results) must be compared with the results transmitted DIRECTLY FROM THE POLLING UNITS. Hence the Act clearly envisages a DUAL collation mode.

That is why INEC assured on 26 February 2023, after it had failed to comply with the law, that “These results cannot be tampered with and any discrepancy between THEM and the PHYSICAL RESULTS used in collation will be thoroughly investigated and remediated, in line with Section 65 of the Electoral Act 2022″. Please, see: “#NigeriaElections2023: INEC Speaks On Why Result Viewing Portal (IReV) Is Not Working, Blames Technical Hitches For Challenges”. Do you agree that the “them” mentioned by INEC refers to the results e-transmitted directly from polling units to the iReV/portal/server on election day, as separate from the “physical results”?

You can get the details from here:
https://lawpavilion.com/blog/fifteen-critical-questions-towards-determining-whether-results-e-transmitted-directly-from-polling-units-are-not-a-mandatory-part-of-the-collation-process-under-the-electoral-act-2022/#:~:text=Thus%2C%20the%20Electoral%20Act%202022,the%20polling%20units%20(iii).

Mr. Man, no umpire changes rule at the middle of the game. Yes, rule can be changed before the start of an event but not when an event as began. Any one that does that had engaged in malpractice and no fairness again.

I've read it to my understanding but there is no electronic transmission of result in the Act whereas it's only the accredited voters which the act make it compulsory to be transmitted electronically either by smart reader or any electronic mean as prescribed by the commission.

Jackiedemie:


I've read it to my understanding but there is no electronic transmission of result in the Act whereas it's only the accredited voters which the act make it compulsory to be transmitted electronically either by smart reader or any electronic mean as prescribed by the commission.

This is the electoral Act quoted verbatim.

Section 60 Nigeria Electoral Act 2022
Counting of votes and forms

(1) The Presiding officer shall, after counting the votes at the polling unit, enter the votes scored by each candidate in a form to be prescribed by the Commission as the case may be.

'footnote'
Note the words "to be prescribed by the commission"

(2) The form shall be signed and stamped by the presiding officer and counter signed by the candidates or their polling agents where available at the polling unit.


(3) The presiding officer shall give to the polling agents and the police officer where available a copy each of the completed forms after it has been duly signed as provided under subsection (2).

(4) The presiding officer shall count and announce the result at the polling unit.

(5) The presiding officer shall transfer the results including total number of accredited voters and the results of the ballot in a manner as prescribed by the Commission.
'footnote'
Pls what are they transferring?
Did the commission prescribed any method to transfer the said accredited voters and results of the ballot?

(6) A presiding officer who wilfully contravenes any provision of this section commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not more than N5 00,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least six months.

'Footnote'
This is the penalty accrued for not following the law and guideline provided by the commission.

Section 64 Nigeria Electoral Act 2022

(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;

'footnote'
Note the word recorded and transmitted. The word is not submitted but transmitted. These are two different words, meaning different thing.

(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.

'footnote'
Transmitted directly from the polling units.

(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.

'footnote'
It is even mandatory for a collation officer or returning officer to compare the recorded results with transmitted results from the above 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
'footnote'
In this section, it was made explicit that in case there is a dispute in the collation of results, it is expected for the collation officer or returning officer to rely on data of accreditation recorded and transmitted directly from each polling unit so disputed.

(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.

(7) If the disputed result under subsection (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 subsection (6) (a)-(d).


Section 65 Nigeria Electoral Act 2022
Decision of returning officer on ballot paper


(1) The decision of the returning officer shall be final on any question arising from or relating to –
(a) unmarked ballot paper;
(b) rejected ballot paper; and
(c) declaration of scores of candidates and the return of a candidate:

Provided that the Commission shall have the power within seven days to review the declaration and return where the Commission determines that the said declaration and return was not made voluntarily or was made contrary to the provisions of the law, regulations and guidelines, and manual for the election.

The last paragraph is even the cruise of everything. The commission even reserve the right to void an announced results within seven days wherein its detected that the declaration was done against the provisions of the law and guidelines and manual for the election.
'footnote'
Breached of:
1. Provisions of the law (both constitution and Electoral Act)
2. INEC guidelines
3. INEC manual so provided
The breached of any of these three can render the election null and void according to Electoral Act quoted above.

Pls I beg you don't reply me in vacuum, reply me on the point of law as I did above.

Oga Smartie, what are you trying to prove with the screenshot, If someone told me " this is a fact" and I queried them "whose fact?" so what.......

And you dont argue with "daft" people yet you are all over this thread huffing and puffing everywhere. It was a simple challenge, just tell us what you have seen that we have not seen since you have a third eye......It appears you are a very arrogant person who thinks so highly of himself and does not want to be questioned... .... and it suffices for you to parry with...." ah I dont argue with daft people..... if you still cannot see it forget it"

JasonScoolari:
Check the screenshot below... Those are some of the reasons I don't argue with daft people.

So, quietly move on.

Baatunde:
Oga Smartie, what are you trying to prove with the screenshot, If someone told me " this is a fact" and I queried them "whose fact?" so what.......

And you dont argue with "daft" people yet you are all over this thread huffing and puffing everywhere. It was a simple challenge, just tell us what you have seen that we have not seen since you have a third eye......It appears you are a very arrogant person who thinks so highly of himself and does not want to be questioned... .... and it suffices for you to parry with...." ah I dont argue with daft people..... if you still cannot see it forget it"

Are you done?

My brother, I swear I really appreciate your comment unlike some brat who thinks he knows better than anyone, simple explanations like this goes a long way .Why I have asked this is that all I have seen is the tendering lots of form EC8s from many states and local governments but I have not been able to deduce from this what is the purpose, is it to show discrepancies in the transmission of results from PU to the final collation centre or what? , because we are not told and we are not able to see the tendered documents simples!

Agadinaagwuofe:


I am responding to you based on the bolded. The EC8As forms of "some" different states presented has alteration and doesn't sum to the total announced from EC8Es which is the state record used to announce result from INEC and all has been admitted as evidences marked as exhibits, BARING ANY SUBSTANTIAL electoral provisions by the defenses in their final addresses to discard those evidences, It might really influence the judges decision. I know many will ask if the amount of the alteration can be enough to change the overall result. Well it is left for the judges to determine when they go through the exhibits and till that I don't think anyone can pre-empt whatever their decisions will be.

Baatunde:
My brother, I swear I really appreciate your comment unlike some brat who thinks he knows better than anyone, simple explanations like this goes a long way .Why I have asked this is that all I have seen is the tendering lots of form EC8s from many states and local governments but I have not been able to deduce from this what is the purpose, is it to show discrepancies in the transmission of results from PU to the final collation centre or what? , because we are not told and we are not able to see the tendered documents simples!

The purpose is to show discrepancies between what was announced to what is summed in the various EC8As tendered. Most times lawyers tries to hide their evidences and present it to judges while at the same time limit the amount of time for the defense council to have proper look at it. For PO counsels to present the EC8As forms it shows there are discrepancies but what is left to know is if the discrepancies amount to number enough to turn the tide of the election. that one is left for the judges to determine.