₦airaland Forum

1b8m:
Hi guys. whats the best most precise way to answer this question?

if points A and B are randomly placed on the circumference of a circle with radius 2, what is the probability that the length of the Chord AB is greater than 2?

The answer will either be in terms of pi (π) or in decimals.

Now here is how I mentally solved it:

Probability (AB > 2) = 1 - Probability (AB < 2)
And Probability (AB < 2) = 2/arc of a semi-circle = 2/πr
Thus Probability (AB < 2) = 2/πr = 1/π

Thus Probability (AB > 2) = 1 ‐ 1/π OR 0.68

Uberfacts just released more documents that I've not even seen before. This is becoming interesting.

advanceDNA:
Okay....if u say so....
Since its "a job" that was mentioned in ur question...i thought it was connoting singularity meaning only one job was available

No, the emphasis was the part I bolded: "The recruiting firm was tasked to recruit at least 25% of people from Ward A and Ward B."

When I said a job, I simply meant the job title. For instance, phone operator. Many people can be employed at the same time as phone operator. Perhaps I didn't coin my words well.

advanceDNA:
A trick question isnt a real problem to be calculated but a kind of riddle..... a trick question is like saying : a plantain farmer plant plantain in a plantain plantation, how many "p" is in that? The answer is zero cos there is no p in "that".....

OK I get your point. It's not a riddle, it's just a maths problem. There is nothing ambiguous in the question.

advanceDNA:
It's a trick question

Many Maths Word Problem are trick questions...that's why it's a Problem

NapoleonHill:
There are over 5000PUs in Rivers which mean you did 3.5% of the result. How can you be 95% sure of a result by inference using 3.5% sample size.

This is especially when we have the actual results.

You cannot call figures that way and say you're 95% sure. Stop misleading people.

The most critical part in sampling is in ensuring the sample was randomly selected. A properly randomized sample with the right research methodology will give a 95% confident result if a margin of error of 5% and a z-score of 1.96 is used. And this applies to all kinds of population distribution, be it gaussian (normal distribution) or binomial distribution or poison distribution, etc. I didn’t just conjure up that sample size, I calculatedit using a sample size formula. I recommend you read random sampling and central limit theorem.

JoshTim:
Oh boy, you have to admit it that the samples you used are skewed to favour Obi. If e sure for you, use another sample set and run the regression, result will shock you your self.

If i begin to analyse your results and methods, you will be amased by the standard error in your result. Come alive, stop sleeping.

Regression ke? Bro do you know what you are saying?

My sample wasn't skewed to favour anyone. Like I said earlier, I used simple random sampling. I generated random numbers using excel. This means every polling units had equal chance of being selected. I really hope you understand Statistics.

JoshTim:
So 5% is the margin of error.

Why not carry out another research and use another sample to test rather than assume your estimate is accurate

I've done mine. And I'm 95% confident. Meaning if you repeat this research 100 times, you will get something similar to my result 95 times. Scientist like Carl Friedrich Gauss have demonstrated this already. But if you are still in doubt, perhaps you can do yours and tell me what you got.

JoshTim:
If you understand statistics so well as you claimed, you will understand that what you just generated is an estimate not the accurate figure.

Statistics is all about estimate bro. I never said my results are 100% accurate. But I'm 95% confident in my estimates.

It's also important to get a representative sample rather than get a sample that is skewed so that your analysis can follow a normal distribution. Else, what you just generated will have standard deviation greater than zero, skewness greater than zero, and curtosis less than 3 or greater than 3.

My sample is a representative sample because I made sure all 23 LGAs were sampled. Also the PUs from each of the LGA samples were in the exact proportion of the PUs in the actual LGAs. So the issue of skewness or kurtosis does not arise here.

I will like to ask the confidence interval for this your result?

95%

Recall I had performed an analysis of the presidential results on the IREV portal and came to the conclusion that APC won based on the results on IREV. See link to the thread here: https://www.nairaland.com/7626424/inec-result-analysis-based-samples

However I noticed some discrepancies in the result for Rivers State and decided to probe further. Again I used simple random sampling and multistage sampling to ensure that every polling unit had equal chance of being selected. I used a sample size of 198. I got the sample size using the formula:

Sample Size = S/(1+S/N)
Where S = z²*p*(1-p)/e²

And where z is the z-score which is 1.96 for a 95% confidence level
p is the population proportion of those who voted in Rivers State which is 15.6%
e is the margin of error which we take as 5%
N is the population size (total number of polling units in Rivers State) which is 6866.

The result is mind boggling.

RESULT
So after collating the results sheets from randomly selected 198 polling units, APC got a total of 4637 votes, LP got 8129 votes, NNPP got 47 votes and PDP got 3578 votes. So LP (and not APC as we were meant to believe) got the majority of votes followed by APC, then PDP and finally NNPP. Infact LP got more than 50% of the vote such that if you combine APC and PDP votes its still less than LP’s votes. This corroborates Peter Obi claim that he got 50% of the votes in Rivers State.

This means LP won more than 12 States (13 States or perhaps more) and APC won less than 12 States (11 States or perhaps less). With this result, I begin to wonder if there are other States with this kind of glaring discrepancies.

---

Caveat:
Whether the results from IREV is authentic or not is a matter for another discuss. My focus was just to use the results I saw on the IREV Portal.

So I have concluded the analysis of the presidential result as a whole and have even created a thread for the result. Below is the excerpt and link to the result thread:

Obinoscopy:
As a statistician, I've always believed in the powers of deductive inference based on sampling.

INEC has uploaded over 94% of the Presidential Results on the IREV Portal. Now there are people who believe that the result announced by INEC is significantly different from the result uploaded on IREV. I decided to randomly select result sheets from IREV and collate. The sample size was 314 result sheets. That sample size was gotten from an online sample size calculator. Click on this link to see my research protocol: https://www.nairaland.com/7614305/statistical-analysis-inec-result-irev

The result is very interesting.

RESULT
So after collating the result sheets from randomly selected 314 polling units, APC got a total of 15394 votes. LP got 10430 votes. NNPP got 2613 votes. And PDP got 11533 votes. So APC got the majority of votes followed by the PDP, then LP and finally NNPP.

This means INEC declaration is in tune with what's uploaded on IREV. However I noticed that the result for Rivers State is very strange. My collated result shows LP has more than 4 times the votes gotten by either APC or PDP.

So in conclusion, the IREV result is almost exactly what INEC declared. The only discrepancy is that of Rivers State. I might have to inspect that of Rivers State even further in my next analysis. But despite the Rivers State discrepancy, APC won fair and square based on the results on IREV Portal. I say this with 95% confidence.

Whether the results from IREV is authentic or not is a matter for another discuss. My focus was just to use the results I saw on the IREV Portal.

https://www.nairaland.com/7626424/inec-result-analysis-based-samples#122034496

advanceDNA:
This election matter no go finish

This is pure mathematics word problem

Solve the mathematics word problem below:

A recruiting firm advertised for a job and people from Ward A and Ward B applied. The recruiting firm was tasked to recruit at least 25% of people from Ward A and Ward B. If there are 3600 people from Ward A and 80 people from Ward B, what's the minimum number of people the firm should at least employ?

A. 880
B. 900
C. 920
D. 925
E. None of the Above

Note: Ward A and Ward B are both Wards ie Ward B is equally as important as Ward A even though it consists of a fewer number of people.

Please show your workings.

tplayer:
"The chances of both type I and type II error is 5%."

This is highly, highly unlikely (in fact impossible) if your sample size is 300 plus.

Otherwise, you have a solid knowledge of statistics.

The formula for sample size calculation is: S = z²*p*(1-p)/e²

Where z is the z-score which is 1.96 for 95% confidence level
p is the population proportion of those who voted which is 28.3%
e is the margin of error which we take as 5%

Solving this will give you a sample size of slightly over 300.

Thus my sample size was more than adequate. The 5% margin of error confirms that my type II error is within 5%. Also my sampling methodology and the entire research protocol demonstrate the power of the study. As regards the possibility of type I error, mere looking at the data, it is obvious there is no type I error. But a confirmatory test can be done using chi-square to test for statistical significant difference between the result I collated from my sample and the result as collated by INEC. The test will reveal that there is no statistical difference with a p-value less than 0.05 (my p-value is actually 0.000031). This explains why I said I am over 95% confident on my result.

I must however repeat my caveat that this study is based on the assumption that the results from IREV are the authentic results. This is being contested in the Courts.

This only confirm the fears in some quarters that Peter Obi stands a chance of being declared in the Courts.

I agree 100%

Chochovini:
. Then do well to delete it pronto cos, Obi swept Taraba from top to bottom.

Well, that's left for the Courts to decide. I hear Obi is challenging the results in 21 States, I hope he succeeds.

Chochovini:
. Excluding Taraba.

Taraba State was also included in my data.

Badgers14:
Sample of 314 polling units out of how many total polling units in Nigeria??

Trying to understand your sampling

Ekpekus:
Random sampling Again, the sample size won't give a true reflection of results.
What was the p-value?

CodeTemplar:
My regard for this moniker just dropped like a thousandth fold.
You expect me to accept your randomness of sample like that. I cannot. The randomness is everything in an exercise like this.

akinade28:
How did you do your sampling? How can we trust your sampling process?

imbless:
Which sample technique did you use? As a statistician u are, why did you use 314 result sheet to judge a population of more than 150k size?
This your analysis is next to bullcrap.

OfficialAPCNig:
My brother that's not how to run statistical analysis for a heterogeneous data population.

First, you have to segment the population into it's homogenous units and then randomly select 314 data points to form your data samples.

In the case of this election, Nigeria is a federation with 36 federating unit and an FCT.

So, make generalization that is valid and representative, you have to randomly select 314 PUs from each state and the FCT. So you need at least a sample size of at least 11,618 to make a valid submission.

But if you are sampling a state, then you need to draw your samples from it's constituent units, that's is the LGA.

So, basing your analysis on a sample size of 314 PUs drawn nationwide will give you a miss leading results.

So, always break a hetergenous population to it's homogenous units before drawing your samples.

Regards

sonnie10:
Out of over 170k polling units you claimed to have used sample size from 314 PUs to come to a reasonable conclusion?.

Secondly, the reliability of the data both from Irev and the online source is questionable. You can’t build truth from falsehood. It is called veracity of information source in data analysis.
So, out of the psychometric properties in data authentication, reliability, veracity and sensitivity , you got none right.

Thirdly, what process did you use in the randomization. Did you consider the skewed manner different voters are distributed in Nigeria . In other words, no standard deviation was considered in your analysis.

What was your inclusion and exclusion criteria when collecting the samples? Not all data should be used for analysis, even if they were randomly collected.

Fifth, you failed to declare your interest in the process. Bias error could affect the method and analysis. Are you APC, LP or PDP? Who is bank rolling you? LP does not give shi shi!

In conclusion, your analysis failed to achieve its intended goal.

thatigboman:
Obinoscopy, no be only u study statistics o. Drop the full evidence of your research. Drop the samples u used, drop the research methodology u used, drop your tools of research analysis and your formulae and lculations used in the research and the results. That enabled you come to this conclusion.
And mind u, if u are a scientist, you know that scientists are not allowed to dabble into politics, just carry out your research and state the result of what u carried out.
And not just say u took the samples from all the whole states, how did u take them? Did u go to Irev for example and choose all the third local govts in each particular state and download all the polling unit results in all of them? And if there are polling units reports missing, did u state that in your comment?

AdoOloro:
You could still be wrong sir. Mere 314 polling stations is inadequate to draw conclusions. What if you chose results from places where the APC had the highest votes and the LP the lowest. Example, the middle belt. Your entire 314, though you selected them randomly, could come from that region. Now imagine that you picked like 70% of that 314 from Lagos and plateau states unknowingly, your conclusions wouldn't be same as you claim now.( Lagos and plateau states being states where the LP which came third in the announcement had crazily high votes)
Even if you decided to pick evenly randomly from each state, your result wouldn't be adequate to draw your kind of conclusion. As you could still have made a one-sided selection.
In a nutshell, my point is, you need all the results of all the polling stations to be able to draw a conclusion.

tplayer:
Hello, well done. I love that you love statistics. Our disregard for it is one reason this nation is not progressing fast. But I have one few question:

How exactly did you arrive at such a very small sample size? I think the statistical power is too low to make your result reliable. You are exposing yourself to too much beta here.

Otherwise, I like your sampling method.

GboyegaD:
Your analysis is very warped. You have less than 1% of the total number of polling units, nothing is said about how you sampled your polling units, and here you are making inferences that generalizes. This is not right in any way for a Statistician and I am very sure you know this.

Inosky:
There are over 176,000 polling units, and you didn't pick up to a thousand of it, only picked 314, my dear, the validity of your result or conclusion is unacceptable and questionable.

You need at least 50% of the polling units' results selected randomly in all the states before making any claims.
If not, die your false claims.

Poanan:
Obinoscopy, i know u went to Unilag and u did project in final year. What i am not sure of is the type of project u did If it is qualitative or quantitative. Using a sample of 341 out of over 170k is not a good sample at all and not representative. This is a very sensitive matter and sample cannot be used to make an opinion. Ask the auditors sometimes they do 100% depending on the materiality of the item.

If you read my OP thoroughly, you would see I also provided a link that showed my research and sampling protocol. But I will explain my research protocol again here. And I will try to be concise.

I got my sample size using an online sample size calculator. It was calculated using a margin of error of 5%, a confidence level of 95%, a population size of 176000 PUs and a Population Proportion of 28% (that is the percentage of voters that actually voted). For those questioning the representative capability of 314 PUs for a population size of 176000 PUs, I recommend you go read statistical sampling. The beauty of sampling is that it enables you make some deduction about the population without having to studying the entire population.

The most critical aspect of sampling is randomization. This is because while sampling, we must ensure that every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected. The best type of sampling is the simple random sampling which is what I did. However i am aware of the heterogeneity of the 176000 PUs, that is while I also did multistage sampling as well. First I made sure ALL the States (including FCT) were represented in the sample. Within each States, LGA and Wards and PUs were randomly samples (multistage sampling).

So in conclusion, my statistical power is strong. The chances of both type I and type II error is 5%. I am 95% confident of my result. I can say that if you manually collate the results for Rivers State, LP won massively. However APC won fair and square if you collate the results from IREV for all the States, FCT inclusive.

However we all know that there are questions on the veracity of the result sheets on IREV. The veracity will be questioned in the Courts, I'm just using the data provided by INEC to make my inference.

Pythagoras001:
did you include the probability that what you have randomly selected may have been doctored in your analysis ?? I have evidence of result uploaded offline been changed after upload. how many times did you repeat the trial with different random sample?? what was the mean, SD? I would suggest pick 100 random polling center run the analysis. pick another 100 random polling center run the analysis 1000 thousand times

GreyLaw:
You are a statistician and not a programmer. Your methodology is wrong from the outset. Your sample based on falsehood.

Let the courts help reveal the real sample then you can apply your statistics. Stop applying statistics on a corrupted sample.

stillme231:
you are getting it wrong.. did they transmit the result automatically? No be wetin Dem read for hall Dem go collate before? U waste ur time dey do yeye statistics lol

InvertedHammer:
/
So far as the results were not uploaded real time as stipulated, the data you used in your analysis is tainted and cooked. What does it take to upload pictures? Rumour has it that INEC refused to give passwords to her staff to do so. That's high level collusion. Thus no human being with an iota of integrity should reference the data uploaded ( or still being uploaded) by INEC.

Even in something as simple as a class research, professors query the integrity of data used in analysis.
/

Onyipk:
As a statistician, who I believe have some knowledge of mathematics and economics , the first thing you should beware of using is altered data filled with corrective fluidl.
Now in accounting another thing you should watch out for is transposing errors.

BIVAS MUST BALANCE.

Thus you must watch out if As figure was moved to C and vice- versa. For February 25, 2023 was a day the greatest OPEN EYE THEFT HAPPENED IN NIGERIA.

Amumaigwe:
That's why INEC declared him the winner. What new information have you put forward? The dispute is that the results uploaded on IREV were falsified. Obi is already in court, you people should meet him there. You people should stop running helter skelter.

AskProf:
A. Recorded after voting at PU.

B. Uploaded to IREV.

chuckdelis:
You failed the ultimate and most important step before data analysis which is data reliability.
There is no point analyzing an incorrect data.

millionaireman:
The result you deduced from what you got from INEC’S IREV portal is the same result the PDP and LP are challenging. So what use is your deducted result, Obinoscopy?

DeTruthh:
Keep deceiving yourself. The results uploaded by INEC, are they the true copy of the results collated and signed by the party agents at the polling units?

Or they are results single handedly written and signed by an INEC official?

Modified. For your last paragraph, we will prove in court. This is because according to the law, it says that the signed copy by all party agents shall be snapped and sent to the IREV.

So those results with same handwriting and signature for different agents just dey make me laugh.

samuelson06:
Your analysis is poor. You can't analyze a bad data. Data on IREV is largely manipulated to favor Tinubu.

justli:
If you paid close attention to the results, you'd have realised the percentage of results mutilated by canceling and adulterating the entered figured is staggering.

luluosas:
Have you laid your hands on the hard copy results sheet that INEC based their SELECTION ON? Just a friendly question please. I come in PEACE. Thank you.

Leon90:
From your analysis, it is quite clear that you do not understand the fraud that happened. The results on IREV portal are those already manipulated before uploading. You should have also checked the scanned result sheets from the polling units you sample and see the magic APC performed.

Deepthoughts:
The results loaded onto the IREV by INEC are dubious n unreliable,they are the written data from the altered n manipulated result sheets from the last presidential election,if you get to see the physical paper copies of some of those results from where the data uploaded onto the IREV was taken you would she'd tears due to how defaced by alteration n cancellations,no sane person in a sane clime would have accepted such as a valid document, I'm sure LP/obi's legal teams made photocopies of them as part of their INEC documents inspectors, Nigerians are going to be shocked,your so call statistical inference is made based on dubious data n therefore baseless, valueless n misleading, going forward parties should always insist on INEC pasting the polling units results of elections at the polling units immediately after the polls before forwarding the results to the collation centres to guard against alterations, falsification n manipulations.

poseidon12:
You are using the already doctored results for your analysis. APC and INEC refused to upload results from the polling units to the IREV until they manually adjust the results in favour of APC. The manipulations happened at the collation centers.
According to INEC guidelines, results are supposed to be uploaded from the polling units, not from the collation centers.
LP won the election. APC came a distant third.

Guys, I know there is justifiable reason to question the result sheets currently on IREV because they were not uploaded in real time. I am not saying the results on IREV are accurate. I am just trying to verify the claim by some people that if you collate all the results on IREV, LP still won. That claim is false. I'm 95% confident that the claim is false. If all the results on IREV are collated, APC won fair and square. LP and PDP are in Court to contest the result. I'm sure they will contest the result sheets on IREV, hopefully they will be able to make their case and prove that the result sheets on IREV are manipulated hence false.

Reno is a confused human being I swear...lol

Sorry guys, I've been away for a while. I will respond to those who critiqued my analysis soon.

omonnakoda:
He is challenging the results
He is asking to be declared winner

Based on the Process. He is asking to be declared winner based on the process. He believes if the process is done well and all the valid votes are counted, he will win.

DaddyFreeze2020:
You picked your sample from one or two geopolitical zones where some parties have the strongest support base.

Next time, pick 10 samples from different wards of different LGAs across each state of all the geo-political zones in Nigeria.

For now, your research is biased and intended to suit the researchers narrative.

I picked my sample from ALL the States.

Beremx:
Peter Obi isn't challenging the results. He is challenging the process that made Tinubu president elect.

That's a smart move.

True. Challenging the process ultimately challenges the outcome of the process.

As a statistician, I've always believed in the powers of deductive inference based on sampling.

INEC has uploaded over 94% of the Presidential Results on the IREV Portal. Now there are people who believe that the result announced by INEC is significantly different from the result uploaded on IREV. I decided to randomly select result sheets from IREV and collate. The sample size was 314 result sheets. That sample size was gotten from an online sample size calculator. Click on this link to see my research protocol: https://www.nairaland.com/7614305/statistical-analysis-inec-result-irev

The result is very interesting.

RESULT
So after collating the result sheets from randomly selected 314 polling units, APC got a total of 15394 votes. LP got 10430 votes. NNPP got 2613 votes. And PDP got 11533 votes. So APC got the majority of votes followed by the PDP, then LP and finally NNPP.

This means INEC declaration is in tune with what's uploaded on IREV. However I noticed that the result for Rivers State is very strange. My collated result shows LP has more than 4 times the votes gotten by either APC or PDP.

So in conclusion, the IREV result is almost exactly what INEC declared. The only discrepancy is that of Rivers State. I might have to inspect that of Rivers State even further in my next analysis. But despite the Rivers State discrepancy, APC won fair and square based on the results on IREV Portal. I say this with 95% confidence.

Whether the results from IREV is authentic or not is a matter for another discuss. My focus was just to use the results I saw on the IREV Portal.

IVORY2009:
Why not, to make the case a smooth ride for the Lp, the said persecutor could be called upon to testify of his findings, and what made Mr Tinubu to forfeit that some of monies to the United States government, regarding him be qualified to run for the top office, it would mean he can not.

Read section 137(1)(e) of the Nigerian Constitution, an exconvict can contest for election after 10 years.

unohbethel:
I think this is very nice

But it wont be done because, no body has brought it to the hearing of the court
Those wo did that (Lp,Pdp) are doing it under the election petition and it will run for a total of highest 180 days

So the Election tribunal wont give the verdict on this 25% ish alone, it has to hear all the cases and give a judgement

Therefore it would be wrong for the tribunal to rush and give a judgement on this particular case and leave the others.. it's not done like that bro

In cases of "constitutional crises" I believe the Courts can do what they have to do to preserve the rule of law.

IVORY2009:
The drug related case is going to be a big one, because the persecutor in far away United States is very much ready to testify against Tinubu, and he is very much still alive

How sure are you that he will testify in a Nigerian Court? He is an American and not required to honor any invitation from a Nigerian Court. And even if he succeeds in convincing the Courts that Tinubu is a convicted drug baron, does it mean an exconvict can NEVER run for elective office for LIFE? I think after a period of time, that exconvict can vie for office. My thinking though.

Asgard13:
What’s the word “ and” ?

Is FCT Nigeria

Or capital of Nigeria ?

Is Abeokuta Ogun state or capital of ogun state …



People are just being Mischievous.. that’s all

The inec chairman sold presidential election for million of dollars..

Supreme Court will clear the matter

I think they had to use AND because using OR would mean something very ludicrous. Imagine if they had said the winner must get 25% of votes in two-thirds of the States of the federation OR the FCT. It would mean mean someone can get 25% in the FCT and not get 25% in the other 24 States and still win the election.

Both the PDP and LP are contesting the Presidential Election and one of their prayers is that the election be cancelled based on the fact that Tinubu failed to get 25% of the valid votes cast in FCT Abuja which they claim is a constitutional requirement.

The part of the Constitution they are citing is Section 134 which states that the winner must meet two requirements:
1. Must get the highest number of votes
2. Must get 25% of the votes in two-thirds of the States of the Federation AND the FCT.

The bone of contention is the "AND" in that FCT requirement. Some school of thought are of the view that the "AND" imply the winner MUST also get 25% of votes cast in the FCT while the other school of thought believe the "AND" imply the FCT MAY also be considered as one of the "States" that MAY make the two-thirds requirements.

It's kind of confusing and that is why it's imperative the Courts wade into this ASAP and give their verdict to prevent any possible constitutional crises. I recommend the Appeal Court gives speedy hearing on the 25% requirement case and give their verdict. This will enable the Supreme Court give a final verdict before May 29 incase the verdict of the Appeal Court gets contested. The Appeal Court can always look at the other prayers of the election petitioners at a later date. Those cases can go beyond the May 29 date.

If you ask me, I think its best the Courts go with the latter school of thought that believe the framers of the Constitution intended to make FCT one of the "States" that MAY (not MUST) be considered when collating States that make the the two-third requirement. Meaning the candidate needs to make 25% of two-thirds of 37 "States" which approximates 25% in 25 "States". FCT can be part of the 25 "States" OR may not. If you ask me, based on INEC results, Tinubu got 25% in 30 States which is more than enough.

The people living in the FCT are not more special than people living in the federation States so it will be wrong to go with the former school of thought of making 25% compulsory for the FCT. If we do that, it means the elections in the FCT will be a do or die affair in the future.

On a lighter note, this electoral conundrum of the definition of the word "AND" is the reason why English is a very problematic subject. I always prefer Mathematics.

---

P.S. I'm an Obidient. I still believe Peter Obi won based on the valid votes cast during the election. I believe Peter Obi won with a wider margin in Lagos, Imo and Plateau State. I believe Peter won Rivers State. I also believe his votes in the other States he lost was more than what was given him. I believe that is his strongest case. This 25% case or the certificate case or the drug case are not strong enough and will be struck off. But these are just my views.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzNchKUi6MU

The former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Olisa Agbakoba, actually saw this political conundrum of 25% requirement coming and wrote to INEC seeking clarification and also seeking their understanding of Section 134 of the Constitution which states that the winner of a presidential election must get 25% of the casted votes in two-thirds of the States and the FCT. He wrote the letter in January, 2023.

The video above even shows Agbakoba asking the INEC spokesman, Festus Okoye, this same question and Festus dodged giving a response. He simply said the INEC Chairman will be the only one who can answer this question and the Chairman will only answer this question after the election is conducted. The video was before the election.

See the video above.