₦airaland Forum

garfield1:
This thing is very simple.get result sheets from thousands of polling units showing that you won or get adhoc staffs,party agents to testify that transmission never took place.

garfield1:
That guy fergie summed up everything. it is impossible to prove substantial non-compliance

garfield1:
The process of judgment are manual and delivery is manual.the backend won't help you.you must call those who were to transmit results to testify.why are you dodging the polling unit evidences? Osun own is different,apc were claiming victory based on 700 cancelled units.obi is not claiming victory

yemex04:
Okay, for the sake of Knowledge how is electronic transmission of result supposed to be done when upload to the IREV portal is taken out of the equation sir?

garfield1:
This analogy is misplaced.the supreme court have stated severally that evidences of elections must be from polling units and witnesses must be from there.calling inec chairman won't help obi.obi must call thousands of presiding officers

garfield1:
Doesnt seem like it.you seem like you have an opinion and you want to force it on others.

garfield1:
They were supposed to do that in 1979 but tactically dodged it.

garfield1:
Is he an it staff?

Was he at the various polling units?

garfield1:
If so,drop this matter

garfield1:
You are correct.you yourself said all criteria for guber and presidential are same so why was it not mandatory for governors to get same in state capitals? Why must fct be mandatory? Is it more important than other states?
Now colloquially or literally,when we talk of the component units,we usually say 36 states and fct.they could have said "and in the fct" afterall they started with in each of at least.

fergie001:
Don't forget, that the lawyers on the other side will also be doing their jobs knowing that INEC is expected to be on their side in Court.

garfield1:
Were you at all the ward and lga collation points to take note that transmitted results were not used to settle disputes? I told you days ago that those disputes being talked of are at the lower collation points that is why the electoral act mentioned polling unit results.now,melaye wasn't challenging the results but was requesting inec to display unit results side by side with declared state results which is impossible.
Now,when a dispute arises at a collation point,the results that were transmitted are jot deleted from bvas.they are still there abi? So the collation officer will simply check the bvas to verify.simple

fergie001:
I will use this simple analogy:

I want to see 17 boys and Seun in my office.

I want to see 17 boys, including Seun in my office.

fergie001:
1. The importance of oral evidence in election petition cases cannot be over-emphasised. I will tell you a story of the cases in Buhari v Yaradua in 2007.

The panel had told Mike Ahamba SAN (Buhari's Attorney) to not waste time calling witnesses and proceed with documentary evidence. The man did and the same Appeal Court upheld Yar'Adua for failure of Buhari's lawyer to call witnesses.

The Supreme Court now floored the lawyer's ego by saying Buhari had a good case but was messed up by his lawyer. Ahamba was so angry that he petitioned the NJC, using very intemperate language calling for the sanction of Justice Niki Tobi who took the lead judgement and the Appeal Court Justices who misled him.

You don't just dump papers in front of the Court without calling those who could say for sure, what happened.

In this kind of cases, you don't create a loophole, you want to seal all ends of the case, especially at the trial stage. If you don't call witnesses, the other side will and score a point with you over that.
The burden of proof is on the plaintiff who should argue on the strength of his case rather than on the weakness of the defendant(s).

When Obi won Ngige in Court, he had 500 witnesses and called 57.
In the Uzodinma-Ihedioha case, Hope called 54 witnesses.

2. The INEC Chairman was subpoenaed in 2019.


garfield1

fergie001:
I have followed these arguments studiously and can say categorically that INEC fell foul of its own Electoral Act.

I have x-rayed Sections 60, 64 and 134 of the Electoral Act, I don't think even the APC lawyers can fault that.

However as is traditional with our Courts.... They will go straight to substantial non-compliance.

How many agents in the 176000 PUs can ascertain (or act as withesses) that these results were not transmitted? Cancellations or otherwise will commence at PUs, can this be proven?

This case reminds me of 2007.... National Elections are difficult to prosecute even for the best of lawyers. Again, this SC gives me absolutely no confidence that the case will be seen thoroughly.

No disrespect to them... If I put them side-by-side Onnoghen, Kutigi, Musdapher, Oguntade, Mukhtar... Your guess is as good as mine.

BIZNess123:
The obedients claim their master won yet cannot give any proof.. other spreading fake news up and down...


Someone that couldn't even get 25 percent in 24 States...such a shame..

Jokay07:
First of all, it's a good thing that you and I have reached a conclusion that Electronic transmission of results is not Factually stated in the act and this is a first win for Inec and Apc.

Secondly,
Emotions aside, your argument is totally flawed sir and you are arguing from a very disadvantage position. No serious court would entertain such blantant misinterpretation of electoral act.

You see, in law, any argument that cannnot be established with fact can also be dismissed without fact.
Let me see your response on this before I move on to the interpretation of "Direct/Directly" in the electoral act sir.

gawu1:
Pitobi badly needs your service now.

Jokay07:
bluntcrazeman
This is the first time I will be reading this article of yours and I am really impressed. But if my memory serves me right, this would be the second topic as regards to the issue of "electronic transmission of results".

You should understand the fact that the interpretation of laws and constitutions are very elastic; with respect to individul's understanding and view.

Firstly, if your argument is factually based on "transmission of results electronically" in the electoral act, then you will need to withdraw and rest your case.

So I ask, is "transmission of results electronically" literally stated or factually imprinted in the electoral act.?

garfield1:
Unfortunately son,nigeria haven't left that school totally

Lithiumite:
Don't you think it's dumb to reason the way you are reasoning?

garfield1:
I already told you earlier some few hours ago that assuming that electronic transmission is mandatory, results were actually transmitted directly by presiding officers after the elections.

Again,the penalty for not transmitting directly is never nullification of elections

Tzar:
Ok. Since the courts have ruled that PDP and LP should have access to INEC records, lets see how it all goes.
If there was any fraud, I am in support of giving it to the rightful winner.

Lithiumite:
The people that created this system are the ones you are accusing of being so dumb that they can implicate themselves ......I think it's those accusing them that are the dumb ones

ACCORDING TO THE ELECTORAL ACT 2022; THE “QUICK TRANSMISSION” OF RESULTS “DIRECTLY FROM THE POLLING-UNITS” IS ACTUALLY MANDATORY, AND NOT OPTIONAL.

Section-64:
Sub-Section-(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; and

(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.

Sub-Section-(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.

Sub-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

(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.

Sub-Section-(7) If the disputed result under sub-section-(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 sub-section-(6) (a)-(d).

Sub-Section-(8.) Where the dispute under sub-section-(6) arose at the level of collation and the returning officer has satisfied the provision of sub-section-(6) (a)-(d), the returning officer shall accordingly declare the winner of the election.

Sub-Section-(9) A returning officer or collation officer, as the case may be, commits an offence if he or she intentionally collates or announces A FALSE RESULT and is liable on conviction to a fine of N5,000,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least three years or both.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION” AND THE IREV-PORTAL..

The “Current” System for the INEC’s Electronic Transmission is called the “Collation Support and Results Verification System -- (CSRVS)”..

It is the INEC’s Online Transmission and Online Collation System for the moment. It is the system to which all the results are supposed to be directly transmitted to.
The collated results are then used by the Collation Officers to verify the results..

This particular system is not meant for the PUBLIC VIEW.. And it is protected with a very strong and tight cyber-security system.
The results that are uploaded into this CSRVS System are NOT in pictures format.
They are most-probably keyed-in by the Presiding Officers.

In the future, the INEC might develop another better system for the purpose of Direct Transmission and Collation of Results from the Polling-Units., but for the moment, the CSRVS is the current Electronic Transmission System.

On the other hand, the IREV-Portal is a portal where the members of the Public Can log in to see the uploaded photos of the Polling-Unit Result-sheets. These uploaded photos on the IREV-Portal are just there for the viewing.
The only function of the IREV-Portal is just for the viewership-sake of the members of the public.
The protection security of the IREV-Portal is not as strong and as tight as that of the CSRVS System.

Crimecity:
https://twitter.com/realkenokonkwo/status/1633079178928050176?t=2HDyZ8a_xmCjtePwRpAhXQ&s=19[/quote]You should dissolve all The Executive Members of all the State Chapters..

OlawaleBammie:
Future...

OlawaleBammie:
Zlp candidate is also from Anambra so he should relegate him abi??

And secondly, how many party do u want this man to join self, d more u join and dump parties the more people see desperations in you.

Apga-pdp-lp-zlp...aahh, abeg leave the man where he is and let him build it like jagaban built APC, Rome was not built in a day.

Lithiumite:
Even a child in pry sch knows there is something called bvas and irev and how they work.....if INEC really intended to rig don't you know they would factor all these into it so as to have a successful plan.......you think they would be so dumb as to collate fake results when they know irev will give them out.

Pls tell us anoda tin abeg!!