₦airaland Forum

Breaking News: Buhari wrote WEAC not WAEC; Keyamo


So its WEAC afterall, no problem

A whole shia-man Oshi-omo-ole

Boris Johnson appoints British-Nigerian as minister
Elections: Presidential candidate withdraws, supports Atiku

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has criticised former Vice President Atiku Abubakar for making public statements on issues, which constitutionally, it noted, should be reserved for the duly elected head of government or his designees.

Mr Abubakar, who was the presidential candidate of the main opposition PDP in 2019, had earlier congratulated Boris Johnson on his emergence as the new British Prime Minister and also his nomination of a Nigerian as minister.

But an irate APC, on Monday criticised Mr Abubakar for acting as a ‘shadow president’ and issuing statements which were under the purview of President Muhammadu Buhari or his designated appointees.
The ruling APC said Mr Abubakar demonstrated a lack of regard for the sovereignty of the office of the President and Nigerian government through condescending statements.

“He has made several of such statements regarding the activities of the Nigerian military, issues of national security, and international relations,” the party said.

Its full statement is reproduced below:
As a Party, we would have thought that Alh. Atiku who in the past occupied such high office as the country’s vice president would clearly understand the workings of government, particularly as it bothers on national security, foreign policy and our international engagement. We have noted Alh. Atiku’s incessant habits of releasing statements on public issues as if he were an alternative President of this country and with a clear intention to undermine President Muhammadu Buhari and the APC-led government.

In recent times, Alh. Atiku has demonstrated lack of regard for the sovereignty of the office of the President and Nigerian government through condescending statements. He has made several of such statements regarding the activities of the Nigerian military, issues of national security, and international relations.

The latest of such statements is the one he made on the emergence of Mr. Boris Johnson as Prime Minister of Britain even when our duly elected President, who has the responsibility of making an official statement on such matter, has made the position of our country known. We note with serious concern that Alh. Atiku has been throwing himself around as a shadow President of Nigeria. We would like to state clearly that such position could only be found under the parliamentary system; it does not exist under the Presidential system of government that we practice in Nigeria.

Alh. Atiku, like every Nigerian citizen, should understand that being a candidate for an elective office, including that of the President, does not confer on him a sovereign status. Alh. Atiku’s continuous portrayal of himself as a shadow President under our system borders on felony and makes him a patent impostor.

There can only be one democratically elected and legitimate government at a time in this country. That clearly is the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. It is important to remind Alh. Atiku that issues of national security, foreign policy and international engagements are not matters to be exploited to achieve mischievous political ends.

We reiterate that Alh. Atiku has lost the 2019 presidential election and it would be unhelpful to him to continue to make a mockery of our country. We expect Alh. Atiku to quickly address himself to the stark reality of his loss and move on. Our laws are clear on all acts of criminalities, in this case, a clear case of felony. Nigerians expect that the enforcement of relevant laws should apply to every Nigerian, irrespective of class and status. This government would not be found wanting where it is required to take decisive actions.

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/343996-atiku-usurping-buharis-responsibilities-apc.html

tuniski:
Chai Chai. The Buharideens and some highly insultive ones amongst them will be insultive instead of discerning.

The heat is on.

Buhari and buharideens the lying gangs

And APC BMO keep shooting themselves in the leg.

Bi iro ba lo logun odun

Tuniski
ChristianiNorth
deji68
FaraAideed

Contrary to the claim that Buhari presented CTC (Certified True Copy) of His certificate.

And its been peddle about by APC amd BMO.

Find below the Ceritify True Copy that wa presented at the Tribunal Today.

Cc: lalasticlala,

Afamed:
Did you find it difficult to understand simple grammar. Accreditation data . How is accreditation similar to transmission of electoral votes and results?. Don't be silly

As usual insult is your second name. Go ahead.

Are you okay now.

Afamed:
Did you find it difficult to understand simple grammar. Accreditation data . How is accreditation similar to transmission of electoral votes and results?. Don't be silly

O ma to ye e, pele

engineerboat:
Tuniski, ChristianNorth,

No wonder INEC chicken out of PEPT

We now know Why INEC go the honourable way

But Mr Agwe, in his oral testimony, said that INEC ICT unit monitored the process centrally in a National Situation Control Room where Presiding Officers transmitted accreditation data from smart card reader to a “back end”

The witness, who was also cross examined by Obinna Adindu, counsel to INEC, said that the commission made a survey of the various places where elections would hold to ascertain the strength of various network services and provided two sim cards of the strongest networks.

“We provided spare card reader machines so that if one failed, the other could be uploaded,” he said.

Tuniski, ChristianNorth,

No wonder INEC chicken out of PEPT

The senator for Anambra South, Ifeanyi Ubah, on Saturday failed in his bid to stop an ICT expert from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from testifying against him at the Anambra Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Awka.

The tribunal had subpoenaed INEC ICT Directorate upon the application of the petitioner, Chris Uba of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), to provide some materials and testify in their matter.

When the INEC staff, Ama Agwe, appeared on the witness box on July 24, counsel to Mr Ubah and INEC, both respondents in the petition, objected and prayed the tribunal to reject his documents and not allow him to testify.

They argued that he was not among those originally listed to testify in the petition and that his written statement on oath was not done within the 21 days permitted by the electoral act.

George Igbokwe, counsel to Mr Uba, reminded the tribunal that the witness was a product of court order and that not allowing him would amount to the denial of fair hearing.

Mr Igbokwe said the objections should be discountenanced and that the court should not reverse itself.

Ruling on the matter at the resumed hearing of consolidated petition No. EPT/AN/SEN/11/2019 on Saturday, the tribunal held that subpoena was a court order similar to a writ of summons and must be allowed to testify.

The ruling which was read by Sunday Olorundahunsi, said that the objection could not be sustained as the argument of listing and front loading witnesses and evidences were not possible because INEC could not have easily deposed written statement against itself as a respondent in the petition.

The tribunal further said that the witness being a product of an order of court must be allowed to testify as the court could not approbate and reprobate at the same time.

“Tribunal is of the view that the INEC ICT Director be allowed to testify,” it ruled.

In his testimony, Mr Agwe, an Assistant Director, said he was in court on the authority of Director of INEC ICT Department, who was summoned by the tribunal.

The witness tendered documentary evidence, including Smart Card Reader accreditation data for all polling units in Anambra South with accompanying certificate of compliance.

Others were manual for election official 2019 and Regulations and Guidelines for conduct of election 2019.

During his cross examination, Dee Nwigwe, counsel to Mr Ubah, cited portion of the documents tendered which provided for alternative means of accreditation of voters in the event that smart card reader malfunctioned or did not have service.

Mr Nwigwe told the witness to provide evidence that there was service in the entire senatorial zone or that he interviewed the Presiding Officers that worked in the district to ascertain that all went well with functionality of smart card reader machines.

But Mr Agwe, in his oral testimony, said that INEC ICT unit monitored the process centrally in a National Situation Control Room where Presiding Officers transmitted accreditation data from smart card reader to a “back end”.

The witness, who was also cross examined by Obinna Adindu, counsel to INEC, said that the commission made a survey of the various places where elections would hold to ascertain the strength of various network services and provided two sim cards of the strongest networks.

“We provided spare card reader machines so that if one failed, the other could be uploaded,” he said.



Three other PDP witnesses, who worked as PDP agents in Nnewi Ichi, Umudim and Uruagu testified to bringing the total of petitioner’s witnesses so far entertained to eight.

The Chairman of the Tribunal, Thelma Okara, adjourned the matter untilto July 29 for further hearing. (NAN)

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/regional/ssouth-east/343514-inec-ict-expert-testifies-against-ubah-at-anambra-election-tribunal.html

deji68:
you are right..... and their submision like

Atiku witnesses ;We transmitted results
INEc will be they didnt quote the code , or didnt see the server so we dont have one (IT dierector was suppose to testify)

Atiku : false entries in 11 state(Exhibit 500000 CTC result)
INEC: we stand by the results declared(no Results sheets submitted by Inec).

Atiku; Video and other internal doc.
INEC; No doc submitted to disprove this.

e.tc....
I think INEC has nothing to lose by not putting a robust defense, if they rely on PDP witnesse , i smell trouble for APC except they make a good case.

APC as usual will not call witness, just to save face may present few but will be there undoing as well

muykem:
They will do that by writing submission. That's not require witness. They will rely on Atiku witnesses that election was manually collated and server is alien to our laws. The other aspect raised by petitioner didn't concern INEC.

But INEC can cancel result in SE, SS, SW, MB, Because card reader could not authenticate voters, but allow the results stands in NE, NW were card readers were not even used right?
3 gbosa for you

muykem:
This is what I said here on nairaland and some people are insulting me. All Atiku witnesses testified in favour of INEC. The worst is the so called star witness.

Which witness support INEC

Okoroawusa:
so a website is a server?

Can you have a website without a server.

Cloud based,
Physical component server

It now depeneds on hownyou want your information harvested

deji68:
so INEC dont need to counter the claims by their staff that they transmitted results ?.internal memo and Training material are they their documents . They 11 contested state with false entries, no collation officer to testify abi?.....well make we wait for the APC and Bubu defence

You know propaganda when you see Zombies runnig their mouth its in their blood.

They keep shouting INEC server as if server is the only ground here.

Server is not even up to 1% of the entire petition.

But APC as usual will dwell on non-issue

tuniski:
Anyone who can't be consistent on identity is suspect in thought.

Don't mind him.

He keep running his mouth shamelessly.

tuniski:
Whatever the outcome Atiku would have done well for our democracy. I respect his democratic credential.

INEC no witness is highly expected.

Bringing up witnesses will be like nailing their coffin the more

iloveyou82:
you and i knew atiku was not the right candidate of pdp, you had no choice than to support him

Are you then the right candidate.

You as well tell Buhari not to show up any defence.

iloveyou82:
as i told you before, nothing to defend, atiku witness has already done the defence, the case has be concluded that inec did not conduct the election electronically

You keep jumping from one moniker to another.

Nobody takes you serious.

Concluded you say, yet keep opening threads about on PEPT,

Why not have you seat and watch as events unfold at the tribunals.

iloveyou82:
that is what i told tuniski and engineerboat

Keep mutiplying monikers

I dont find this funny.

How will a teacher ask his student this kind of Question in writting examination for a primary school.

The question:

Write.

FIFTY THREE DAYS NO SALARY


Surprising the date is so another case 53rd June 2019


Which state could this be Nairalanders

Ao INEC cannot bend rule in NE, NW, NC but strictly follow their guidelines in Sw, se, ss

So INEC must tell the court they allow that and they must pbe able to defend the discrepancies

rkennyking:
OK SCR is legal because its within freehand of INEC and also I think there is a legislation to it already. But this is what I see , places where INEC could use SCR but failed to use maybe cancelled and places where its not possible they have to result to incident form. I mean normally its okay to use SCR in Lagos but some places in north its not possible so are we going to disenfranchised those people ?? No but we can have plans to suite this situations which is what INEC did. Borno with lot of terrorism destruction in place can't use SCR or electronic transmission successful. This is the issue . but the problem with transmission is different because the legislation is clear on that, only manual is recognized. If we did use manual transmission successful all over the country we can't use electronic transmission successfully hence the only one we can rely on is manual still

Let me gove you a case study.

Where I voted.

The SCR could not authenticate a single voter and at the end The PO and APO waited for replacement, when its getting certain no replacement is forthcoming they said ewe should vote once we can recognize our name from the list.

To my suprise on getting to collation centre, whooas, where SCR could not authenticate voter, such unit amount to zero.

How do you see that

rkennyking:
so for as long as its not a legal thing then it can't be forced on Inec. Moreover transmission require legislation everything inec do requires. Else it will be nullified. The law of Nigeria only recognized manual transmission go and read up the constitution bro

Does the usage of SCR to authenticate voter require legislative approval

rkennyking:
the usage of SCR is with INEC prerogative so its left to them to determine. Its not legal that is what we are saying transmission too is not legal. See the whole verification done on election day can be jettisoned In court by good lawyers . all this SCR and co are all a support system and INec is very careful with them. Yes they may have transmitted election electronically but constitutionally the result can only be recognized when transmitted manually

CAN you say.

For your information, INEC cancel several polling units because card readers could not authenticate Voters, I am a witness to this.

Even while announcing result, they had to cancel where card readers could not be used.

But you will agree with me, whatever guidelines INEC laid down also have a vital effect on the outcome of the election.

You cannot agree that SCR is not legal, and at the same time the major means of authenticating voters.

rkennyking:
Smart card Readers are very different from electronic transmission. The purpose of SCR was contended in court in past election and we all see the result. Which was why incident form was introduced. You see one thing we all after recognize is that election in Nigeria is manual and anything that conflict with that is defeated. If we use any electronic advancements it should assist the manual not jettison it for now. So if manual transmission produce Buhari then E-voting can only corroborate that or it will be discarded. Its just like any new laws in Nigeria that conflicts with existing laws will be discarded for sure

So inec can cancel a polling unit because they did use SCR while they turn blind to its non usage in some area right

rkennyking:
but still the result recognized legally will always be manual. If we are going to have a E-voting system we can't go on this way. Because if manual and electronic transmission have this much discrepancies then we give excuse to fault E-voting process. Apparently they can blame discrepancies on hacking , lack of technical know how and other things

Is SCR recognized in our electoral law

rkennyking:
no you are the one missing the point . when the INEC Rac-Tech team you alleged imputed all the counted votes into the INEC SCR as alleged by you are Nigerians there ?? Any form of transmission that is not clearly recognized and agreed to by voters is nulled. I voted and I only witnessed vote counting and input of result in the result form which is used for the manual counting. Anything but that is nulled. Yes Inec might use electronic privately for any purpose known yo inec but that can't displace the authentic result from manual transmission. Vote is a manual thing in Nigeria , this is why the incidence form was introduced you can't disenfranchised a Nigerian just because of an electronic device no.

It's part of INEC internal control mechanism.

Are you saying its the counted vote that eventual gets to Abuja.

Lots of padding by crooked officials

garfield1:
Oh,so polling unit results are so important and you didnt advice atiku to use them

As usual, you come here to show your true colour.

Cancelling osun PU result is legal

While cancelling Akpabio PU result is illegal.

Keep living in your fool paradise

garfield1:
Seems your living there already.the constitution which is supreme says manual accreditation is s must boy

Go to the court and stop ranting here

plaindealer:
There's no need for INEC to break a sweat over a crumbled and DOA case based on den say den say INEC get server but no proof. Even the so called SCAM expert failed to INEC server, juts den say den say about obtained rubbish from another website.


Look here, server or no server, it is against the law to transmit election results electronically so whatever server or results atiku obtained from the Dark Web is rubbish, it's inadmissible and at the end of the day won't be admissible and eventually thrown out like bad akpu..

Is SCR in our law.

How INEC mandated all its PO AND APO where SCR is mot used, suh result stand cancelled