Currently, according to our laws, the burden of proof of any claim of election rigging rests on the candidate who is alleging. It follows in the legal doctrine of “he who alleges must prove.” But I think this is wrong.

It is wrong because after INEC declares anyone winner, the aggrieved candidate usually relies on INEC to get the materials he needs to prosecute his case. And from experience, INEC sometimes frustrates such candidates or deliberately distort those documents or withhold some. This much was visible in the case of Peter Obi at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.

But should the law be amended to shift the Burden of Prove to INEC, whenever any candidate is aggrieved and he approaches the court, the responsibility would rest on INEC to demonstrate and prove to the court how they arrived at the result they used in declaring the winner.

This is good because when INEC realizes that they would have to prove how they arrived at winners in over 1000 constituencies, they would be forced to be so transparent that losers would have little to no reason to approach the courts.

This is part of the reforms needed to sanitize our electoral process.

In addition, there should be be severe consequences for INEC officials, including the Chairman, if they fail to abide by the letters of the Electoral Act or any other regulations guiding the conduct of elections.

A situation where the Chairman of INEC will oversee a sham in the name of election, and walk away without consequences should be a thing of the past.

I propose a 20 years jail term for any INEC chairman who fails to supervise an election according to the dictates of the law.

Similarly, I propose 10 years jail term for any other official of INEC whose department experiences any lapse during election or any adhoc staff who is proven to have deviated from the guidelines guiding the conduct of elections.

It should be made in such a way that people will be running away from serving in INEC for fear of going to jail. But their pay should be made handsome as motivation for the job.

We cannot continue in the path we are going right now or vultures will succeed in taking over Nigeria.

Nigeria must and will be sanitized to work for all Nigerians and not a select and privileged few.

Penguin2:


But should the law be amended to shift the Burden of Prove to INEC, whenever any candidate is aggrieved and he approaches the court, the responsibility would rest on INEC to demonstrate and prove to the court how they arrived at the result they used in declaring the winner.

.

INEC will explain to the court how the results were collated from the polling units to the ward, from the ward to the local government, from the local government to the state

Then the court will give judgement base on the fact that INEC was able to explain how they arrive at the results that were called.

Paraman:




INEC will explain to the court how the results were collated from the polling units to the ward, from the ward to the local government, from the local government to the state

Then the court will give judgement base on the fact that INEC was able to explain how they arrive at the results that were called.

Exactly!

But not just explanations alone. They would also bring every supporting documents and ballot papers that they used in arriving at a winner.

This current practice where you tell an aggrieved candidate to go and look for evidence to prove that an election was rigged is just wrong. And it is why INEC always has the audacity to misbehave and rig elections and go ahead to frustrate aggrieved candidates by denying them of the things they need to seek redress.

Penguin2:

Exactly!

But not just explanations alone. They would also bring every supporting documents and ballot papers that they used in arriving at a winner.

This current practice where you tell an aggrieved candidate to go and look for evidence to prove that an election was rigged is just wrong. And it is why INEC always has the audacity to misbehave and rig elections and go ahead to frustrate aggrieved candidates by denying them of the things they need to seek redress.

Sure, they will produce every necessary documents, after that the Judges will rule in favor of INEC