IamV:

Good afternoon everyone,just want to inform you all I won't be able to create a live thread on today's proceedings at the tribunal.
I'm heavily engaged.
Deeply sorry about that.
But I will definitely do that tomorrow.

You all have a great day.

IamV hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

senatordave1:


Are you aware that inec has csvsr or so which is the primary election storage and not irev? Irev is just for public viewership!

But INEC never made reference to any csvsr in their 2023 Regulation for the conduct of the general elections. You're the one trying to manufacture what is not and court will never admit what is not written in the constitution, electoral Act or INEC guidelines for the conduct of the elections.

Here below is INEC reference to the use of IREVs for the conduct of the election. So stop manufacturing your intent to justify your assertion.

92. At every level of collation, where the INEC copy of collated results from the
immediate lower level of collation exists, it shall be adopted for collation.

93. Where the INEC hardcopy of collated results from the immediate lower level of
collation does not exist, the Collation Officer shall use electronically transmitted
results or results from the IReV portal to continue collation. Where none of these
exist, the Collation Officer shall ask for duplicate hardcopies issued by the
Commission to the following bodies in the order below:
(i) The Nigeria Police Force; and
(ii) Agents of Political Parties

94. Where no hardcopy of collated results is available, the results, where possible,
shall be regenerated from the preceding level (Collation or Polling Unit) in
accordance with Clause 93 of these Regulations and Guidelines

You see IREVs boldly written on clause 93. I will be glad if you can point out where INEC reference your so called csvsr. I know you will still find way to deflate to another thing. Keep it up.

IfnobeGod20:

But INEC never made reference to any csvsr in their 2023 Regulation for the conduct of the general elections. You're the one trying to manufacture what is not and court will never admit what is not written in the constitution, electoral Act or INEC guidelines for the conduct of the elections.

Here below is INEC reference to the use of IREVs for the conduct of the election. So stop manufacturing your intent to justify your assertion.

92. At every level of collation, where the INEC copy of collated results from the
immediate lower level of collation exists, it shall be adopted for collation.

93. Where the INEC hardcopy of collated results from the immediate lower level of
collation does not exist, the Collation Officer shall use electronically transmitted
results or results from the IReV portal to continue collation. Where none of these
exist, the Collation Officer shall ask for duplicate hardcopies issued by the
Commission to the following bodies in the order below:
(i) The Nigeria Police Force; and
(ii) Agents of Political Parties

94. Where no hardcopy of collated results is available, the results, where possible,
shall be regenerated from the preceding level (Collation or Polling Unit) in
accordance with Clause 93 of these Regulations and Guidelines

You see IREVs boldly written on clause 93. I will be glad if you can point out where INEC reference your so called csvsr. I know you will still find way to deflate to another thing. Keep it up.

The electoral law clearly says transmit to inec server.eveb that guidelines clearly upholds the supremacy of the physical hard copy

danijesus:
IamV hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I'll try to update you guys

LP (Dr Livy): My Lords we are ready to continue and to conduct the proceeding in P I N Ikwueto.
LP Ikwueto: Good Afternoon.
Court (Justice Ugo): Good Afternoon before you say we did not respond (Court laughs, mainly the APC section)
LP: Thank you My Lord. We call up the subpoenaed witness no. 8.
1st Res: I was just given a witness statement is morning and it is about 8 pages. If we take him now, I will request that the cross examination be deferred till tomorrow so that I can study the documents.
2nd & 3rd Res: I was served just before my Lords came in. We can cross examine tomorrow with kind permission to my noble Lords.
4th: It is the same situation here. We were served just about the time your Lordships were coming in. All indications point to the fact that this witness is an expert witness. We need time to understand and respond appropriately his written statement on oath. I therefore align myself to the suggestion put forward by the first and second & third respondents in urging my Lords that this witness be taken in chief and get cross examined tomorrow.
LP: I accept the suggestion.
Court: Go on.
(Witness swears)
(Court laughs because the court staff leading the swearing seems to stutter continuously when trying to pronounce a phrase “solemnly swears”)
LP (PIN): When it’s noisy that can happen
Court (Ugo): Didn’t want to say but this is a glitch (court laughs loudly)
LP: Tell the court your name

W: Chibuike Ugboke
LP: You live at Wuse 2 Abuja (reads address)
W: Yes
LP: What’s your occupation?
W: I’m a cyber security expert.

LP: You were called through a subpoena?
W: Yes
LP: Can I see it?
W: Yes
LP: My Lords we apply to have the subpoena tendered in evidence.
Respondents: No objection

Court: Admitted & Marked PCK

LP: Pursuant to the subpoena you came to this court and deposed to a witness statement on the 21st of June, 2023?
W: That is correct
LP: If you see a copy will recognize it?
W: I believe I have my signature and there are relevant sections if I see I will recognize.
Lp: Hand it to him
W: This is my witness statement
LP: We move to adopt the witness statement.

All Respondents Object

LP: We will give our responses in Final written address.
LP: Paragraph 23, 24 & 25 of that statement, you attached copies of what you described as Metadata to polling unit results?
W: That is correct
LP: Is this a copy of the documents you referred to as the metadata in those paragraphs?
W: Yes that is correct
LP: I apply to tender the documents in evidence

All Respondents Object!

[6/21, 3:34 PM] + Court: Marked PCK1
LP: Finally in paragraph 26, you referred to sources to material published and issued by INEC on 2018 to 2023 with specific URI?
W: That is correct.
Court: What is the name of the document?
LP: It is a press release dated November 11, 2022 named: “Alleged plot to abandon online transmission…” signed by Festus Okoye?
W: That is correct
LP: You attached that to your statement? (Please show him)
W: That is the the document
LP: We moved to tender them in evidence

All Respondents Object!
[6/21, 3:39 PM] +234 803 391 0455: Court: Document titled “Alleged plot to abandon online transmission of polling unit results of IREV portal” are ADMITTED and marked ECK2

[6/21, 3:43 PM] : Ikechukwu Ezechukwu SAN will present the next witness.

The witness was called to the box, and he swore with the bible and introduced himself as Onoja Loko Sunday from Human Child Rescue Initiative. He was also invited to court with a Subpoena.
[6/21, 3:46 PM] : LP (PIN): That will be all for this witness
Court: The witness is stood down till tomorrow by 2pm for cross examination
LP(PIN): I will hand back over to my leader, Dr. Livy.
LP: (Dr. Livy): I will hand over to Ikechukwu Ezechukwu (SAN) to handle the next proceedings
LP (Ikechukwu SAN): We will call another witness My Lords.
(Witness steps up and swear with Bible)
LP: Can you please tell the court your name
W: I am Onoja Loko Sunday
LP: What do you do for a living
W: I am a staff of women child rescue initiative. A non-profit organisation.
LP: You came here on a subpoena
W: That is correct
LP: Do you have it with you?
W: Yes My Lord
LP: Can I have it?
W: Yes My Lord
LP: We seek to tender the subpoena in evidence
1st Res: No objection my Lord
2nd & 3rd (Olanipekun SAN): Emmanuel Ukala SAN will take charge of proceedings
2nd & 3rd (Ukala SAN): We have no objection.
4th: No objection
[6/21, 3:48 PM] Onoja Loko Sunday, next witness (PW9) from Human Child Rescue Initiative will be presented by Ikechukwu Ezechukwu SAN!

[6/21, 3:53 PM] Court: Admitted and Marked PCL
LP: You attested to a witness statement
W: Yes
LP: If you see it will you recognize it?
W: Yes
LP: How will you recognize it?
W: My name and signature
LP: Do you want the court to adopt this witness statement?
W: Yes
1st Res: We object and will reasons are address stage
2nd & 3rd: We object based on the same grounds which we have objected to similar applications of subpoenaed witnesses
4th: We also object for similar reasons as before which will also express in writing at the address stage.
Lp: In paragraph 2 you mentioned in your witness statement your identification card as an observer of the 2023 Presidential elections. Do you have it?
W: Yes
LP: We seek to tender the identification card.

No objection from Respondents
[6/21, 4:00 PM] Today is A Mixture of Objection and No Objection From the Respondents

Stand Down For Now! 😂

Court: marked PCM1
LP: May we apply that the witness be permitted to substitute the exhibit with the photocopy thereof.
Court: Let them handle that.
Lp: That will be all.
Court: Cross examinations
1st Respondent:
1st Res: The ID you submitted was not accredited from INEC correct?
W: Correct
1st Res: You did not play any role as an election official did you?
W: No. purely an observer
1st Res: From your observation, the voting and counting went well?
W: Yes My Lord
1st Res: In Para. 7 you made reference to form EC8A and it was duly signed by the party agents and presiding officer?
W: Correct
1st Res: Your party won the election in that polling unit right?
W: I don’t work for any party
1st Res: Your candidate?
W: I don’t have any
1st Res: You did not handle any BVAS machine in that polling unit?
W: No
1st Res: From your observation, the polling unit official went away with the form EC8A that had been signed by the party agents and Presiding officer right?
W: Yes
1st Res: That will be all

2nd & 3rd Respondents Cross examination (Ukala SAN)

2nd & 3rd: Take a look at the Subpoena you came to court with, Exh PCL. Kindly confirm that it was not addressed to women and Child initiative but it was addressed to you?
W: Yes
2nd & 3rd: Not only was it addressed to you personally but it was addressed to you with your direct village address?
W: Yes
2nd & 3rd: From your observation at the polling unit you can confirm that voting went on smoothly and results were announced there?
W: Yes
2nd & 3rd: You can also confirm that the electoral officers complied with the electoral act from your observation?
W: Yes
2nd & 3rd: At the end, the results went to the collation agent?
W: It was not uploaded.
2nd & 3rd: (repeats question)
W: Does it have to go to the collation center before it is uploaded (court laughs)
Court: (Repeats question)
W: Yes that’s what they told us
2nd & 3rd: Will you be surprised to see it was uploaded on IREV platform?
W: I won’t be surprised.
2nd & 3rd: That’s all.

4th Respondent cross examination
4th: My Lord the witness is a gentle man, I have no questions for him. (Court laughs)

Court: Any re-examination?
Lp: None my Lord
Court: You are discharged
LP: May we call our next witness. Ephas Iya

Cc seanfer,ifnobeGod, penguin2,vicdom,wegevv,workch,kyase

senatordave1:


The electoral law clearly says transmit to inec server.eveb that guidelines clearly upholds the supremacy of the physical hard copy

Is the IREVs owed by my father or FIRS? I thought it was launched by INEC for the purpose of the election. You're even wrong, the electoral Act never said server but it says transmit as may be prescribed by the commission. And what did the commission prescribed, that can be found in clause 93 of their guidelines.
My brother nobody is talking of supremacy or no supremacy, you're making assumption. If the law says transmit, whether it would be use or not, you must just obey the law first. Section 47 is very clear for all polling units agents to transmit their snapped results into what INEC will prescribe. You is to obey first, that is the law.
Again, when there is contention in the collation of results, the law first mandate the collation or returning officer to look into the results transferred into the IREVs in the absence of the INEC hardcopy, according to Electoral Act 64 and clause 93 and 94, before considering hardcopy with police and political party agent.
You now know the big burden on the INEC, their hardcopy must tally with what political party agents and that in IREVs. If not there will be serious issue.

IfnobeGod20:

Is the IREVs owed by my father or FIRS? I thought it was launched by INEC for the purpose of the election. You're even wrong, the electoral Act never said server but it says transmit as my be prescribed by the commission. And what did the commission prescribed, that can be found in clause 93 of their guidelines.
My brother nobody is talking of supremacy or no supremacy, you're making assumption. If the law says transmit, whether it would be use or not, you must just obey the law first. Section 47 is very clear for all polling units agents to transmit their snapped results into what INEC will prescribe. You is to obey first, that is the law.
Again, when there is contention in the collation of results, the law first mandate the collation or returning officer to look into the results transferred into the IREVs in the absence of the INEC hardcopy, according to Electoral Act 64 and clause 93 and 94, before considering hardcopy with police and political party agent.
You now know the big burden on the INEC, their hardcopy must tally with what political party agents and that in IREVs. If not there will be serious issue.

What matters is what is on electoral act not inec guidelines.the court will always give supremacy to the electoral act.the primary result is ec8a.inec has transmitted and a copy of what is transmitted is still in the bvas except deleted.irev is not in the electoral act and therefore irrelevant.no one is claiming supremacy but proving that indeed inec transmitted and used the transmitted results to collate.so far,no proof of non transmission and non use of transmitted results for verification by collation officer...obi has failed woefully with these tactics employed.today was another bad day

So far,the hard copy has not been manifestly proven to differ from the irev on a large scale or on a substantial base so no problem

senatordave1:
Cc seanfer,ifnobeGod, penguin2,vicdom,wegevv,workch,kyase

I saw what you posted but lots of mix-up. You also refused to hide the identity of the WhatsApp number you copied them from. You've exposed the person privacy to the world. Look at this, go and delete it "+234 803 391 0455". When you do that finished, I will delete this too.

senatordave1:
Cc seanfer,ifnobeGod, penguin2,vicdom,wegevv,workch,kyase

Where workch sef

Kyase:



Where workch sef

Awol like digitron.pemguin will last last follow.you know any amb washima

IfnobeGod20:

I saw what you posted but lots of mix-up. You also refused to hide the identity of the WhatsApp number you copied them from. You've exposed the person privacy to the world. Look at this, go and delete it "+234 803 391 0455". When you do that finished, I will delete this too.

Ok.thanks.i didn't notice

senatordave1:


What matters is what is on electoral act not inec guidelines.the court will always give supremacy to the electoral act.the primary result is ec8a.inec has transmitted and a copy of what is transmitted is still in the bvas except deleted.irev is not in the electoral act and therefore irrelevant.no one is claiming supremacy but proving that indeed inec transmitted and used the transmitted results to collate.so far,no proof of non transmission and non use of transmitted results for verification by collation officer...obi has failed woefully with these tactics employed.today was another bad day

So far,the hard copy has not been manifestly proven to differ from the irev on a large scale or on a substantial base so no problem

I won't argue again with you on the viability of the IREVs to the electoral Act because nothing one say that you will ever believe because you're all out to dispel the link between IREVs and the electoral Act. I won't go further on it again.

My brother, you presume too much. Hope you're aware that LP had deposited their polling units results in the court? It's only INEC that have not given the LP all the CTC of what they used for the election. And they have also deposited the hard copies transferred to the INEC server for scrutiny and comparison. I am surprise that it is taking INEC donkey year to make available what they used for election.

IfnobeGod20:

I won't argue again with you on the viability of the IREVs to the electoral Act because nothing one say that you will ever believe because you're all out to dispel the link between IREVs and the electoral Act. I won't go further on it again.

My brother, you presume too much. Hope you're aware that LP had deposited their polling units results in the court? It's only INEC that have not given the LP all the CTC of what they used for the election. And they have also deposited the hard copies transferred to the INEC server for scrutiny and comparison. I am surprise that it is taking INEC donkey year to make available what they used for election.

Honestly,I also want us to stop arguing about sections of the law that are ambiguous until the court makes pronouncement just as they made on double nomination.it is tiring and futile.sept seems far...but adeleke vs oyetola gave us a clue.but think about this if accreditation transferred to inec server from bvas is third hand,is it the one transferred to irev from same bvas that is first hand? Apply discretion here...

Tendering exhibits in court is one thing,linking it to specific parts of the case and making reference to it or expatiating on it on open court is another thing.obi has tendered result sheets hardcopy yet is silent on them.instead of him to have recounted them or commissioned a mathematician to analyse and tabulate them,he tabulated the irev copies .does that not tell you that tinubu actually won in both physical and soft copies? Unlike 2019,obi has not said in court or brought evidence or alternate results showing he won.instead,all his evidences are geared towards proving irregularities.

That is why She stressed she is an "expert witness" by virtue of his legitimate proffesions. The fact that She contest in the election or she has a case with INEC does not count. Is it a crime to venture in more than one career or jobs? This is one of the advantages.
Like me now, am a Land Surveyor and also a Real Estate Agent. Am also into Agriculture. I have a fair knowledge and skills in electronic repairs and trouble shooting. What more? I have programming skill in Python. Is it a crime? Abi E shock you?

Olabestonic001:


The same lady that is an Outsourced Staff of Amazon? An LP candidate in the just concluded election? The same one that does not have an Amazon ID? The same lady that has a court case with INEC?

She seems like a discredited witness.

senatordave1:


Are you aware that inec has csvsr or so which is the primary election storage and not irev? Irev is just for public viewership!

You know why I said this is not your field

CVR is voters registration server for INEC

You can view your own Voter card information on the csvr portal.

Senatordave01 INEC HAVE Different platforms and portal for different purposes.

So allow All petitioner to go with whatever's suite them don't bring in wbat You don't have grip information on.

What concerns csvr with IREV when they serve different purposes

senatordave1:


Are you aware that inec has csvsr or so which is the primary election storage and not irev? Irev is just for public viewership!

Primary storage for voters registrations which also have a sub-domain for voters accreditation because it the baseline.

However IREV is having its own server and storage partitions from the entire server.

senatordave1:


You don't assume sir.we follow the law and this is why lp And pdp loses.send to inec server for not irev

Stop confusing yourself

You don't understand server and portal.

Did you understand domain and subdomain

Do you understand storage allocation

Do your understand server resources.

This are what you should know now.

BVAS can be used to access about 4 types of servers by INEC using different application on tbe BVAS.

Each application have its seperate root directory on tbe server.

There is cloud server which is why all INEC BVAS can upload and function from anywhere.

There is physical system for the offline server. Where testing is done and all necessary coding before uploading the writti code to form what the viewr see on the website.

So please get more information is that clear

senatordave1:


Honestly,I also want us to stop arguing about sections of the law that are ambiguous until the court makes pronouncement just as they made on double nomination.it is tiring and futile.sept seems far...but adeleke vs oyetola gave us a clue.but think about this if accreditation transferred to inec server from bvas is third hand,is it the one transferred to irev from same bvas that is first hand? Apply discretion here...

Tendering exhibits in court is one thing,linking it to specific parts of the case and making reference to it or expatiating on it on open court is another thing.obi has tendered result sheets hardcopy yet is silent on them.instead of him to have recounted them or commissioned a mathematician to analyse and tabulate them,he tabulated the irev copies .does that not tell you that tinubu actually won in both physical and soft copies? Unlike 2019,obi has not said in court or brought evidence or alternate results showing he won.instead,all his evidences are geared towards proving irregularities.

You're getting confused


EA gave INEC Power to set guideline.

And INEC Publicly announced the guidelines.

At many collation centre, result where tampered with which is totally different from PU result.

However by law INEC has made provision for onsite uploading to serve as check in such situation.
Those collation officers ignore such.

Now we are where we are

engineerboat:


You're getting confused


EA gave INEC Power to set guideline.

And INEC Publicly announced the guidelines.

At many collation centre, result where tampered with which is totally different from PU result.

However by law INEC has made provision for onsite uploading to serve as check in such situation.
Those collation officers ignore such.

Now we are where we are

No evidence that collation officers ignored it.results from irev and ec8a will differ but by how widespread?

engineerboat:


Stop confusing yourself

You don't understand server and portal.

Did you understand domain and subdomain

Do you understand storage allocation

Do your understand server resources.

This are what you should know now.

BVAS can be used to access about 4 types of servers by INEC using different application on tbe BVAS.

Each application have its seperate root directory on tbe server.

There is cloud server which is why all INEC BVAS can upload and function from anywhere.

There is physical system for the offline server. Where testing is done and all necessary coding before uploading the writti code to form what the viewr see on the website.

So please get more information is that clear

My brother,the most important copy is the physical copy.any thing online is secondary

senatordave1:


No evidence that collation officers ignored it.results from irev and ec8a will differ but by how widespread?

But INEC said that there was a glitch on the election day that affected the irev.

So what's the possibility of the availability of irev abi you just they talk without proper reasoning ni

senatordave1:


My brother,the most important copy is the physical copy.any thing online is secondary

Sorry then i must say you don't know what us going on in the court.

senatordave1:


No evidence that collation officers ignored it.results from irev and ec8a will differ but by how widespread?

I can't help you further ire ooo

IfnobeGod20:

But INEC never made reference to any csvsr in their 2023 Regulation for the conduct of the general elections. You're the one trying to manufacture what is not and court will never admit what is not written in the constitution, electoral Act or INEC guidelines for the conduct of the elections.

Here below is INEC reference to the use of IREVs for the conduct of the election. So stop manufacturing your intent to justify your assertion.

92. At every level of collation, where the INEC copy of collated results from the
immediate lower level of collation exists, it shall be adopted for collation.

93. Where the INEC hardcopy of collated results from the immediate lower level of
collation does not exist, the Collation Officer shall use electronically transmitted
results or results from the IReV portal to continue collation. Where none of these
exist, the Collation Officer shall ask for duplicate hardcopies issued by the
Commission to the following bodies in the order below:
(i) The Nigeria Police Force; and
(ii) Agents of Political Parties

94. Where no hardcopy of collated results is available, the results, where possible,
shall be regenerated from the preceding level (Collation or Polling Unit) in
accordance with Clause 93 of these Regulations and Guidelines

You see IREVs boldly written on clause 93. I will be glad if you can point out where INEC reference your so called csvsr. I know you will still find way to deflate to another thing. Keep it up.

Leave him alone.

He's confused, he heard the word cavs (continous accreditation and voting syste) but did not know what are system components.

CVRS is continous Voters registration viewing portal, he knows nothing about INEC servers and various portal, he's just jumping up and down quoting different story, you will be surprised at his next reply to you, no correlation

senatordave1:


The electoral law clearly says transmit to inec server.eveb that guidelines clearly upholds the supremacy of the physical hard copy

And wbat is server

How many server beloging to INEC that you know

How many domain name of INEC that you know


How many subdomain name of INEC that you know

Instead of taking time to understand issue you will keep quoting what is not