pedel:
Who issued the conflicting reports?

Pierocash:
Don't really know where he is standing. His statement is not clear.

Which one is minority,and which one is majority. How are the judges and not voters picking winners

garfield1:


Section 64 has made voters register irrelevant in proving overvoting.check section 64(2-7)

garfield1:


Not true.bvas reports are the data sent directly from bvas after accreditation and election except you mean even the results declared can be written and compromised.

ejimatic:
What is the secondary evidence used as the basis of the judgment?

garfield1:


Bvas and bvas reports are the same

Omoawoke:


Does that mean that if I’m losing a polling unit, I can ensure there is over voting so they cancel the result which will eventually be in my favour

gasparpisciotta:


He is talking about 3judges deciding the fate of thousands of voters

Masterito:
So who did the overvoting favor? How did the court know over voting was for Adeleke?

rolams:


That's why the court must examine the BVAS machine, voters register and form E8.

pedel:
What are you talking about? Did you read a copy of the majority judgement or you only read the emotional comments on Nairaland?
INEC contributed to the cancellation of the election because they didn’t follow their own rule.
The BIVAS data and form EC8 they gave to Oyetola shows that the number didn’t tally. Don’t forget this was the number they used in declaring the winner.
Oyetola went to the tribunal based on that.
INEC realised they messed up, they issued another BIVAS data calling it a supplementary result.
The number of actual vote cast as recorded in EC8 is more than the numbers of voters accredited by BIVAS. This is a case of over voting and according to the Electoral Act 2022, the votes has to be cancelled.
INEC allowed people who were not accredited by BIVAS to put put their ballot paper in the box.
The day of stuffing ballots is over. People can not sit in one room and thumb print thousands of ballot paper and dump it in the ballot after colliding with INEC officials.
The BIVAS is the game changer.
If you allow unaccredited person to vote in your polling unit, you risk cancellation of the entire election in that unit.
Stop being sentimental. SC will not be able to impeach the ruling of the tribunal.
When you find your stolen phone in the pocket of someone and they have removed your SIM card and changed the phone case will you agree that the person is not a thief?
Stop allowing Nigeria politics to damage your brain. Think with facts; not emotions.

Peacecore:
Sometimes, I don't know how you people think. Looking at the judgement, no one was accused of being the perpetrator rather the whole votes were cancelled. It affected all the candidates including YPP candidate. Why Oyetola was declared winner was bcoz the overvoting happened more in Adeleke's strong bases.

rolams:


I get your point but in this case there is no option than examining all the required tools such as BVAS, form E8 and the the voters card.

It's a miscarriage of justice is the judgement is based on the BVAS report submitted by the petitioner alone.

rolams:


No my bro. BVAS is the machine itself while the report is a paper.

Omoawoke:


Does that mean that if I’m losing a polling unit, I can ensure there is over voting so they cancel the result which will eventually be in my favour

sunray:




Blame INEC who generated 3 conflicting reports on BVAS. They cannot convince the judges.

highchief1:
u no read for school na.some of us that read understand him bro.Try go back to school

Pierocash:
shut up. He only edited his post and changed headline after I commented

rolams:


We are having two conflicting reports here, the best option is to examine the machine through which the data was gotten from.

rolams:


We are having two conflicting reports here, the best option is to examine the machine through which the data was gotten from.

Pierocash:
Don't really know where he is standing. His statement is not clear.

Which one is minority,and which one is majority. How are the judges and not voters picking winners

chris51:



I don't understand the man's statement. Not clear

Aiel123:

But bvas is used for accreditation. Any issue concerning over voting ,bvas should be considered.

yemex04:










Cancellation was in order because it is difficult to establish which of the votes is overvote given that the votes would most likely belong to more than one Party.

The Tribunals derives its power for cancellation for Section 136 sub section 3 of the 2022 electoral Act as attached.

ejimatic:


Achebe’s Eneke the bird appears in Osun election tribunal judgement
Chinua Achebe's proverbial bird made a rare appearance in court on Friday
ByAbdulqudus Ogundapo January 28, 2023 Reading Time: 3 mins read

Eneke the bird made a rare apprarance in court on Friday as the Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal cited the proverbial bird in its judgement.

Eneke is a proverbial bird to which an unforgettable line on survival was attributed in Mr Achebe’s classic novel, Things Fall Apart.

In the majority judgement, read by its chairman, Terste Kume, the tribunal said former Governor Gboyega Oyetola of the All Progressives Congress (APC) won the election and not Governor Ademola Adeleke of the PDP, who was returned by INEC.

Mr Kume accused INEC officials of tampering with the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines to compromise the election in favour of Mr Adeleke.

“The said conduct of the officials of the 1st Respondent, as shown in this judgement, makes the proactive decision of Eneke, the bird in the Novel, Things Fall Apart, 1958 by Chinua Achebe very instructive. In the said novel appears these words; “Men have learnt to shoot without missing, she has learnt to fly without perching.”

Mr Achebe used the quote by the proverbial bird to illustrate how people were adapting to changes in the society in colonial time Igbo land in now South-east Nigeria.


The tribunal chairman said electoral officials manipulated the BVAS machines but did not cover their tracks.

Manipulation
Mr Kume faulted the synchronisation of the BVAS machines after the election, which INEC had cited as explanation for producing two contradictory sets of data on accredited voters.



The INEC counsel, Paul Ananaba, had during cross-examination argued that the election results in possession of the petitioners were incomplete because it was issued to them before the BVAS machines were synchronised.

The INEC counsel said the petitioners had therefore challenged the outcome of the election with incomplete data.


But the tribunal chairman insisted that the results of the election were still not accurate after the said synchronisation of the BVAS machines.

“We have looked, and evaluated the evidence of the parties as shown in the exhibits before this Tribunal. The contents of the exhibits are clear as day. The said evidence is not from the fertile and creative imagination of learned counsel for the Petitioners, as erroneously submitted by learned counsel for the Respondents in their respective reply addresses on points of law to the issues under consideration,” he said.



“The ‘synchronisation’ of the documents made by the 1st Respondent, and the physical inspection of same done by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, as shown in the table herein before reproduced, run riot to the defences raised by each of the Respondents to this petition in respect of issues 2 and 3 under consideration,” he added.

“The said ‘synchronisation’, rather than rhyme with each other are inconsistent and contradictory. The said exhibits tendered by the Respondents have not rebutted the presumption of regularity in favour of exhibit BVR and the other documents tendered by the Petitioners in this petition,

“In other words, the defences of the Respondents are plagued with fundamental mortal flaws highly irreconcilable and unreliable, incapable of defeating the credible evidence tendered by the Petitioners in respect of the 744 Polling Units were over-voting has been established.”



The Tribunal chairman maintained that evidence before the panel showed that the governorship election was not conducted in compliance with the provision of the Electoral Act.

“The inference, we hereby draw from the facts established by the evidence on record is that, the election conducted on the 16th day of July, 2022 was done in substantial non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act (Supra), and the extant regulations made thereunder,” he noted.


“Moreover, exhibit BVR has not been withdrawn by the 1st Respondent who made and issued it. The Petitioners relied on exhibit BVR in maintaining this petition. The Respondents are hereby stopped from acting inconsistent with the import and tenor of exhibit BVR. See Section 169 of the Evidence Act (Supra). See also Thaddeus v. Atule (2022) LPELR-57539 (CA) 1 at 57-59, paras, F-A; Agboguuleri v. Depo & Ors (2008) LPELR-243 (SC) 1 at 17-18, paras, C-C; AG. Rivers State v. A.G Akwa Ibom State & Anor (2011) LPELR-633 (SC) 1 at 21-22 paras F-A and Mabamije v. Otto (2016) LPELR-26058 (SC) 1 at 15-16 paras C-B,” he cited.

“Similarly, the exhibits tendered by the Respondents after exhibit BVR, as rightly submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioners were thought of after the declaration of result on the 17th day of July, 2022. See Agbonifo v. Aiwereoba (Supra); Lawal v. State (2010) LPELR-46221 (CA) 1 at 23 paras B-C; PDP & Anor v. Aminu & Anor (2019) LPELR-47330 (CA) 1 at 34-35 paras C-D and Agbo v. State (2006) LPELR-242 (SC) 1 at 43-44 paras G-B,”

“The said conduct of the Respondents, especially, the 1st Respondent amounts to tampering with official records. See Agbonifo v. Aiwereoba (Supra) at 20 – 21 paras F-A, per Nnaemeka-Agu (JSC) of blessed memory,”

“The conduct of the 1st Respondent in the said election under consideration has produced multiple accreditation reports contrary to its avowed declaration to conduct free, fair and credible elections on the basis of one man or woman with one vote.”

|

|
Tribunal chairman mocks Adeleke for dancing “Buga”
"The 2nd Respondent cannot "go lo lo lo lo" and "Buga won" as the duly elected Governor of Osun State in the election conducted on 16h day of July 2022

ejimatic:


Achebe’s Eneke the bird appears in Osun election tribunal judgement
Chinua Achebe's proverbial bird made a rare appearance in court on Friday
ByAbdulqudus Ogundapo January 28, 2023 Reading Time: 3 mins read

Eneke the bird made a rare apprarance in court on Friday as the Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal cited the proverbial bird in its judgement.

Eneke is a proverbial bird to which an unforgettable line on survival was attributed in Mr Achebe’s classic novel, Things Fall Apart.

In the majority judgement, read by its chairman, Terste Kume, the tribunal said former Governor Gboyega Oyetola of the All Progressives Congress (APC) won the election and not Governor Ademola Adeleke of the PDP, who was returned by INEC.

Mr Kume accused INEC officials of tampering with the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines to compromise the election in favour of Mr Adeleke.

“The said conduct of the officials of the 1st Respondent, as shown in this judgement, makes the proactive decision of Eneke, the bird in the Novel, Things Fall Apart, 1958 by Chinua Achebe very instructive. In the said novel appears these words; “Men have learnt to shoot without missing, she has learnt to fly without perching.”

Mr Achebe used the quote by the proverbial bird to illustrate how people were adapting to changes in the society in colonial time Igbo land in now South-east Nigeria.


The tribunal chairman said electoral officials manipulated the BVAS machines but did not cover their tracks.

Manipulation
Mr Kume faulted the synchronisation of the BVAS machines after the election, which INEC had cited as explanation for producing two contradictory sets of data on accredited voters.



The INEC counsel, Paul Ananaba, had during cross-examination argued that the election results in possession of the petitioners were incomplete because it was issued to them before the BVAS machines were synchronised.

The INEC counsel said the petitioners had therefore challenged the outcome of the election with incomplete data.


But the tribunal chairman insisted that the results of the election were still not accurate after the said synchronisation of the BVAS machines.

“We have looked, and evaluated the evidence of the parties as shown in the exhibits before this Tribunal. The contents of the exhibits are clear as day. The said evidence is not from the fertile and creative imagination of learned counsel for the Petitioners, as erroneously submitted by learned counsel for the Respondents in their respective reply addresses on points of law to the issues under consideration,” he said.



“The ‘synchronisation’ of the documents made by the 1st Respondent, and the physical inspection of same done by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, as shown in the table herein before reproduced, run riot to the defences raised by each of the Respondents to this petition in respect of issues 2 and 3 under consideration,” he added.

“The said ‘synchronisation’, rather than rhyme with each other are inconsistent and contradictory. The said exhibits tendered by the Respondents have not rebutted the presumption of regularity in favour of exhibit BVR and the other documents tendered by the Petitioners in this petition,

“In other words, the defences of the Respondents are plagued with fundamental mortal flaws highly irreconcilable and unreliable, incapable of defeating the credible evidence tendered by the Petitioners in respect of the 744 Polling Units were over-voting has been established.”



The Tribunal chairman maintained that evidence before the panel showed that the governorship election was not conducted in compliance with the provision of the Electoral Act.

“The inference, we hereby draw from the facts established by the evidence on record is that, the election conducted on the 16th day of July, 2022 was done in substantial non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act (Supra), and the extant regulations made thereunder,” he noted.


“Moreover, exhibit BVR has not been withdrawn by the 1st Respondent who made and issued it. The Petitioners relied on exhibit BVR in maintaining this petition. The Respondents are hereby stopped from acting inconsistent with the import and tenor of exhibit BVR. See Section 169 of the Evidence Act (Supra). See also Thaddeus v. Atule (2022) LPELR-57539 (CA) 1 at 57-59, paras, F-A; Agboguuleri v. Depo & Ors (2008) LPELR-243 (SC) 1 at 17-18, paras, C-C; AG. Rivers State v. A.G Akwa Ibom State & Anor (2011) LPELR-633 (SC) 1 at 21-22 paras F-A and Mabamije v. Otto (2016) LPELR-26058 (SC) 1 at 15-16 paras C-B,” he cited.

“Similarly, the exhibits tendered by the Respondents after exhibit BVR, as rightly submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioners were thought of after the declaration of result on the 17th day of July, 2022. See Agbonifo v. Aiwereoba (Supra); Lawal v. State (2010) LPELR-46221 (CA) 1 at 23 paras B-C; PDP & Anor v. Aminu & Anor (2019) LPELR-47330 (CA) 1 at 34-35 paras C-D and Agbo v. State (2006) LPELR-242 (SC) 1 at 43-44 paras G-B,”

“The said conduct of the Respondents, especially, the 1st Respondent amounts to tampering with official records. See Agbonifo v. Aiwereoba (Supra) at 20 – 21 paras F-A, per Nnaemeka-Agu (JSC) of blessed memory,”

“The conduct of the 1st Respondent in the said election under consideration has produced multiple accreditation reports contrary to its avowed declaration to conduct free, fair and credible elections on the basis of one man or woman with one vote.”

|

|
Tribunal chairman mocks Adeleke for dancing “Buga”
"The 2nd Respondent cannot "go lo lo lo lo" and "Buga won" as the duly elected Governor of Osun State in the election conducted on 16h day of July 2022

SmartyPants:


Appeals are not determined on the strength of previous judgments - neither the majority or minority decision is decisive. What matters is the argument the counsels can put forth on the appeal.

rolams:


I read the judgement. BVAS should have been examined not the report because there are two conflicting reports.

ejimatic:


Achebe’s Eneke the bird appears in Osun election tribunal judgement
Chinua Achebe's proverbial bird made a rare appearance in court on Friday
ByAbdulqudus Ogundapo January 28, 2023 Reading Time: 3 mins read

Eneke the bird made a rare apprarance in court on Friday as the Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal cited the proverbial bird in its judgement.

Eneke is a proverbial bird to which an unforgettable line on survival was attributed in Mr Achebe’s classic novel, Things Fall Apart.

In the majority judgement, read by its chairman, Terste Kume, the tribunal said former Governor Gboyega Oyetola of the All Progressives Congress (APC) won the election and not Governor Ademola Adeleke of the PDP, who was returned by INEC.

Mr Kume accused INEC officials of tampering with the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines to compromise the election in favour of Mr Adeleke.

“The said conduct of the officials of the 1st Respondent, as shown in this judgement, makes the proactive decision of Eneke, the bird in the Novel, Things Fall Apart, 1958 by Chinua Achebe very instructive. In the said novel appears these words; “Men have learnt to shoot without missing, she has learnt to fly without perching.”

Mr Achebe used the quote by the proverbial bird to illustrate how people were adapting to changes in the society in colonial time Igbo land in now South-east Nigeria.


The tribunal chairman said electoral officials manipulated the BVAS machines but did not cover their tracks.

Manipulation
Mr Kume faulted the synchronisation of the BVAS machines after the election, which INEC had cited as explanation for producing two contradictory sets of data on accredited voters.



The INEC counsel, Paul Ananaba, had during cross-examination argued that the election results in possession of the petitioners were incomplete because it was issued to them before the BVAS machines were synchronised.

The INEC counsel said the petitioners had therefore challenged the outcome of the election with incomplete data.


But the tribunal chairman insisted that the results of the election were still not accurate after the said synchronisation of the BVAS machines.

“We have looked, and evaluated the evidence of the parties as shown in the exhibits before this Tribunal. The contents of the exhibits are clear as day. The said evidence is not from the fertile and creative imagination of learned counsel for the Petitioners, as erroneously submitted by learned counsel for the Respondents in their respective reply addresses on points of law to the issues under consideration,” he said.



“The ‘synchronisation’ of the documents made by the 1st Respondent, and the physical inspection of same done by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, as shown in the table herein before reproduced, run riot to the defences raised by each of the Respondents to this petition in respect of issues 2 and 3 under consideration,” he added.

“The said ‘synchronisation’, rather than rhyme with each other are inconsistent and contradictory. The said exhibits tendered by the Respondents have not rebutted the presumption of regularity in favour of exhibit BVR and the other documents tendered by the Petitioners in this petition,

“In other words, the defences of the Respondents are plagued with fundamental mortal flaws highly irreconcilable and unreliable, incapable of defeating the credible evidence tendered by the Petitioners in respect of the 744 Polling Units were over-voting has been established.”



The Tribunal chairman maintained that evidence before the panel showed that the governorship election was not conducted in compliance with the provision of the Electoral Act.

“The inference, we hereby draw from the facts established by the evidence on record is that, the election conducted on the 16th day of July, 2022 was done in substantial non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act (Supra), and the extant regulations made thereunder,” he noted.


“Moreover, exhibit BVR has not been withdrawn by the 1st Respondent who made and issued it. The Petitioners relied on exhibit BVR in maintaining this petition. The Respondents are hereby stopped from acting inconsistent with the import and tenor of exhibit BVR. See Section 169 of the Evidence Act (Supra). See also Thaddeus v. Atule (2022) LPELR-57539 (CA) 1 at 57-59, paras, F-A; Agboguuleri v. Depo & Ors (2008) LPELR-243 (SC) 1 at 17-18, paras, C-C; AG. Rivers State v. A.G Akwa Ibom State & Anor (2011) LPELR-633 (SC) 1 at 21-22 paras F-A and Mabamije v. Otto (2016) LPELR-26058 (SC) 1 at 15-16 paras C-B,” he cited.

“Similarly, the exhibits tendered by the Respondents after exhibit BVR, as rightly submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioners were thought of after the declaration of result on the 17th day of July, 2022. See Agbonifo v. Aiwereoba (Supra); Lawal v. State (2010) LPELR-46221 (CA) 1 at 23 paras B-C; PDP & Anor v. Aminu & Anor (2019) LPELR-47330 (CA) 1 at 34-35 paras C-D and Agbo v. State (2006) LPELR-242 (SC) 1 at 43-44 paras G-B,”

“The said conduct of the Respondents, especially, the 1st Respondent amounts to tampering with official records. See Agbonifo v. Aiwereoba (Supra) at 20 – 21 paras F-A, per Nnaemeka-Agu (JSC) of blessed memory,”

“The conduct of the 1st Respondent in the said election under consideration has produced multiple accreditation reports contrary to its avowed declaration to conduct free, fair and credible elections on the basis of one man or woman with one vote.”

|

|
Tribunal chairman mocks Adeleke for dancing “Buga”
"The 2nd Respondent cannot "go lo lo lo lo" and "Buga won" as the duly elected Governor of Osun State in the election conducted on 16h day of July 2022