₦airaland Forum

IS THE “IREV-PORTAL” MENTIONED IN THE ELECTORAL ACT 2022?

In this topic, I will X-Ray the so-called “IREV-PORTAL” of the INEC.

In this topic, we will determine whether the “IREV-PORTAL” is against the Nigerian Electoral Laws or Not.

A lot of politicians and persons are already believing that there is No Provision made inside the Electoral Act 2022 for the so-called “IREV-PORTAL”. This is as a result of the various recent court judgements which were delivered due to the various recent election-petitions.

But then, the main question here is this:
“Is it really true that there is No Provision that is made for the IREV-PORTAL inside the Electoral Act 2022, and that there is No Part of the Electoral Act which either directly or indirectly describes the IREV-Portal.?”

The Section-62(2) of the Electoral-Act-2022 clearly describes what the IREV-PORTAL is supposed to be, both in its presentation, and in its appearance, and in its function; even though the Section-62(2) called it “National Electronic Register of Election Results”.

TAKE NOTE OF THE NAME.

With this pointed out, it is now up to the INEC to name the IREV-PORTAL properly -- according to the actual name which the Electoral-Act-2022 suggests for it -- which is “National Electronic Register of Election Results”, and for them to also upload ALL the collated results into the Electronic Register too -- as clearly stated inside the Electoral-Act-2022.

And now, to another very important question:
“Whether the Electoral-Act-2022 mandated the INEC to, as quickly as possible, complete the uploading of ALL the election results into the IREV-PORTAL within a recorded time -- and also, whether the Electoral Act 2022 gave INEC any form of timeline for them to upload the election results into the IREV-PORTAL”.

Section-62(2) made it very clear that the uploading of the Election Results into the IREV-PORTAL is supposed to be done “ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS”
(Note: there is serious Emphasis on “On a Continuous Basis”), this phrase simply means that the uploading of results in the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” (or whichever name that INEC decides to call it) does not have to stop at any time - or even be delayed -- until the uploading is completed.

(It is worthy of note at this point that no petitioner had ever brought-up these points during their various election-petition tribunals for determination and interpretation by the judges).

Then again, Section-62(3) made it clear that ANY PERSON or ANY PARTY CAN request for the Certified True Copies (CTCs) of the Results that are uploaded into the “National Electronic Register of Election Results”.

Furthermore, Section-74(1) of the Electoral-Act-2022 stated clearly that INEC has only 14-DAYS for them to produce ANY DOCUMENTS which their CTCs were applied for by any of those parties; and then, the Electoral Act made it an offence if INEC did not comply.

TAKE NOTE OF THE 14-DAYS.

This means that the Parties who intend to petition any election should endeavour to APPLY TO THE INEC for the CTCs of the results which were uploaded into the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” (Or IREV-PORTAL) alongside other applications which were supposed to be made by them to the INEC -- immediately the RESULT of the election is announced.

Then Finally, Section-146(1) made it very clear that the Tribunal can give an order for the inspection of any document or “Packet” which was used for the election.

“Packet” here can also include both the BVAS-Machines and the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” (or IREV-PORTAL).

The Petitioners should request for the Tribunal to ORDER FOR THE INSPECTION of the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” to take place on the 14th day after the APPLICATION for the CTCs, alongside the time when the request for the order for the inspection of the BVAS-MACHINES and other possible “Packets” and “Documents” are made.

This would serve the purpose of checking-out for any possible tampering with the backend of the “National Electronic Register of Election Results”.

The inspection will also ensure that the copies of all the necessary results from the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” which are required to establish the facts of the petition were uploaded into the “National Electronic Register of Election Results”., and then, if they were not uploaded, INEC must have to call a subpoenaed witness to explain the reason for such.

The inspection will also help the Petitioners to establish whether INEC uploaded ALL the COLLATED RESULTS into the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” (or IREV-PORTAL) in accordance with the Section-62(2) of the Electoral-Act-2022.
Else, if they did not upload ALL the collated results, it will be considered as a BREACH of the Electoral-Act-2022.

As for those ones who would be saying that the IREV-PORTAL is a mere viewing portal, and is totally different from the “National Electronic Register of Election Results”, you all need to read-up my response to Aieromon in the comment below, and at the same time provide the answers to the questions by yourself to yourself..

There are a lot of little-little hidden things that are still embedded inside the Electoral-Act-2022 which both the Nigerian Citizens and the Nigerian Politicians are seriously overlooking every time.

And yet, they are busy clamouring for the electoral reforms..

With this said, it is very clear that if we have electoral reforms, we will still not digest it very well, and the same political juggernauts will still turn it upsidedown on-top-of our heads once again.

The IREV is merely a public viewing portal and not an electronic register.

All parties have access to the certified true copies of result sheets. An electronic register will still remain restricted and not open to the public.

aieromon:
The IREV is merely a public viewing portal and not an electronic register.

All parties have access to the certified true copies of result sheets. An electronic register will still remain restricted and not open to the public.

Na now you come.

You don finally land for the spot where I wanted you to land.

What you are saying here is that “INEC continues to operate the IREV-PORTAL which is supposedly not allowed in the Nigerian Electoral Laws, and yet they continue to waste lots of money on it every time, and you think it is very okay.”

Now,, I have some few questions for you..

1. If IREV-PORTAL is not allowed in the Electoral-Act-2022, and yet INEC continues to operate it, is INEC not supposed to be considered as going above the law?

2. Isn't it a total waste of the nation’s scarce funds (embezzlement is actually the right word) for INEC to be operating a “mere viewing portal”, whereas there is no Nigerian Laws that is backing-up the so-called “viewing portal”?

3. Can you show any proof that any other type of “Electronic Register of Election Results” apart from the so-called IREV-PORTAL is existing, and that INEC actually restricted it from public knowledge -- yet it is in existence?

4. If it is established that the INEC actually have any other type of “Electronic Register of Election Results” which is separate from the IREV-PORTAL, why then are they still wasting money to be operating the IREV-PORTAL which is not a part of the Electoral Laws, rather than maintaining and running only the “Electronic Register of Election Results” which is already Legally existing?

5. If it is established that the INEC does Not have any other type of “Electronic Register of Election Results” apart from the so-called IREV-PORTAL, doesn't it now mean that the INEC is totally going against the Section-62(2-&-3) of the Electoral-Act-2022 in all ramifications by operating a so-called illegal portal?

6. Why did the supreme court judges in the judgement of Atiku-vs-INEC/Tinubu/APC-(2023) equated the “IREV-PORTAL” to the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” of the Section-62(2) of the Electoral-Act-2022.?

7. The BVAS-MACHINE is not mentioned in the Electoral-Act-2022. What is mentioned is “Smart-Card Reader or any other technological device deployed for accreditation of voters”. Yet, the Judges interpreted the line to also include BVAS-MACHINES. Does it mean that the Judges cannot also interpret the Section-62(2) to also mean the IREV-PORTAL?

8. According to the term “REGISTER” and what “Register” is supposed to mean and serve, is the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” supposed to be Restricted From View? According to what Registers are supposed to be, are they supposed to be hidden from public view?

Lalasticlala, Seun

Nlfpmod

Thank you for this subject matter.

I find it difficult to align myself with you on the basis of similarity between the IReV portal and the National Electronic Register for Results which is a distinct database.

I will come to this later on.

The power to issue regulations and guidelines for elections is constitutionally vested in INEC and have been reappraised in several Supreme Court Judgements.

Section 148 of the Electoral Act 2022 invests that power on INEC:
The Commission may, subject to the provisions of this Act, issue regulations, guidelines, or manuals for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of this Act and for its administration.

Section 60(5) of the Electoral Act 2022 was clear:
The presiding officer shall transfer the results including total number of accredited voters and the results of the ballot in a manner as prescribed by the Commission.

If I play the devil's advocate and INEC insists that results should be transferred via IReV and their polling officers refuse, what happens?
Does it lead to invalidation of the results ... See what the Electoral Act says;

Section 60(6) of the Electoral Act 2022:
A presiding officer who wilfully contravenes any provision of this section commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not more than N500,000 or imprisonment for a term of at least six months.

You can see that it doesn't invalidate the election because Section 60(5) does not say results will be transferred electronically. It only said in a manner prescribed by the Commission, however, it stated clearly results duly signed and stamped. Hence Form EC8A is the building bloc and foundation of our electioneering system.

Again, even though BVAS was not specifically mentioned in the EA 2022;
See Section 47(2):
To vote, the presiding officer shall use a smart card reader or any other technological device that may be prescribed by the Commission, for the accreditation of voters, to verify, confirm or authenticate the particulars of the intending voter in the manner prescribed by the Commission.

I am not unmindful that the Supreme Court inter alia in Atiku v INEC stated clearly that the Manual Regulations and Guidelines has some force of law and contravention invites punishment, however, there is a caveat....

Section 134(2) of the Electoral Act 2022:
An act or omission which may be contrary to an instruction or directive of the Commission or of the officer appointed for the purpose of the election but which is not contrary to the provisions of this Act shall not of itself be a ground for questioning the election. (You can review Atiku v INEC 2023 & Tonye Cole v Fubara 2023)

However, the use of the IReV portal has not done away with foundational bloc which is the stamping and signing of Form EC8A as provided for in Section 60(1-5) and 64 of the Electoral Act 2022. It follows therefore that the inclusion of non-compliance with the Manual for Election Officials 2023 as well as INEC’S 2023 General Elections approved Guidelines in the circumstances of this case is improper and non-tenable.

Now linking IReV portal to National Electronic Register of Results.
These two aren't same. Whilst the IReV portal is a live event that takes place on the spot to boost voter confidence, the National Register is like a bank, a distinct database that houses all results. Both aren't same.
Section 62(2) spoke about it been a repository: a place where data can be stored or managed. Again, there is no length of time by which this continuous update will expire or discontinue.

I have seen with full respect your trying to link both as having the same meaning but I disagree;

Where the provisions of a statute is straight forward and unambiguous the Court cannot read into the statute what is does not contain, A statute must be solemnly interpreted in a manner that will project and bring out succinctly the real intention of the law makers. No extraneous matter should be allowed to stray into the principles of interpretation of an Act or Constitution See Atiku v INEC 2023

The cardinal principle of interpretation is that when the words of the statute or instrument are clear and unambiguous they must be given their ordinary natural simple meaning. A Court of law, in its interpretative jurisdiction, lacks jurisdiction to import or impute into a statutory provision words which are not therein used. Its duty being only to interpret the provisions in order to bring out the meaning of the words used in the statute and the intent of the lawmaker See Dickson v Sylva (per Kekere-Ekun JSC as she then was).

Again, the Electoral Act was emphatic about not mentioning IReV, only INEC's regulations and Guidelines mentioned IReV.

“Indeed, since the Guidelines and Manual, which authorised the use and deployment of the electronic Card Reader Machine, were made in exercise of the powers conferred by the Electoral Act, the said Card Reader cannot, logically, depose or dethrone the Voters’ Register whose juridical roots are, firmly embedded or entrenched in the self same Electoral Act from which it (Voter’s Register), directly derives its sustenance and currency. Thus, any attempt to invest it (the Card Reader Machine procedure) with such overarching pre¬eminence or superiority over the Voters’ Register is like converting an auxiliary procedure – into the dominant procedure of proof, that is proof of accreditation.” (Garba JCA as he then was).

What this simply means is that in a face-off between the Electoral Act v the Manual Regulations of INEC, the Electoral Act wins. Once it is not in the Electoral Act, it is a tier-2 subsidiary legislation.

To cap it all, the SC in Oyetola v Adeleke on IReV;
Non-transmission of results to IReV portal does not and can not stop the collation of results or invalidate the Electoral process.

Bkuntcrazeman

fergie001:
I will react after this nonsense I am watching in the name of match.

No Wahalla

I would also love your views/inputs too..

Cc..
Garfield1, Penguin2, Racoon, Dalitigator, Helinues

Who cares if it's mention or not, when riggers will still tell their opponents to go to court knowing fully well that the judges will do their biddings.

aieromon:
The IREV is merely a public viewing portal and not an electronic register.

All parties have access to the certified true copies of result sheets. An electronic register will still remain restricted and not open to the public.

Exactly, all parties had agents at polling units where they had to sign the result sheets.
That's more important than IREV.
Show us result sheets that differ from what INEC reported.
That's what's important. Any computer system can be hacked or even malfunction.
Even in the US, whenever therr is an election dispute, they always go back to the real papers for recount.

aieromon:
The IREV is merely a public viewing portal and not an electronic register.

All parties have access to the certified true copies of result sheets. An electronic register will still remain restricted and not open to the public.

Just leave him. Let him continue to make himself happy.

Saying irev is the same as the electronic register mentioned in the electoral act.

When you store data in Excel sheets, what do you call that? Is it paper register?

Dey play.

Inec coming up with irev is to help their own internal process. If they make it public to you, that does not mean it is acceptable as the source of truth for the elections (even given the fact that i.pobidients can even attack/hack the irev porter and inject their own results.


So once again, let him continue to make himself happy at his new found past time

BluntCrazeMan:
IS THE “IREV-PORTAL” MENTIONED IN THE ELECTORAL ACT 2022?

In this topic, I will X-Ray the so-called “IREV-PORTAL” of the INEC.

In this topic, we will determine whether the “IREV-PORTAL” is against the Nigerian Electoral Laws or Not.

Constitution supercedes the Act



The SC subsisting judgments on IREV have relegated it to the second place.It is irrelevant in our election.In fact it is a waste of time.
So it is for ever.

What legal minds have said about the IREV that I agree with is that the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC Guidelines may have made provisions for the IREV but one thing that eluded all of us is that the same law didn’t state consequences for when the IREV doesn’t function or has ‘glitch’.

This loophole was what APC lawyers exploited at PEPT and as painful as it was/is, they are right.

When we eventually have a president who cares about reforms, one of the things that would have to be included in our electoral law would be the invalidation of an election where the IREV fails to function and also some years of jailterm for any electoral officer who helps rig elections.

And lastly, death penalty for election thugs who escape shoot at sight order.

BluntCrazeMan:
Na now you come.

You don finally land for the spot where I wanted you to land.

What you are saying here is that “INEC continues to operate the IREV-PORTAL which is supposedly not allowed in the Nigerian Electoral Laws, and yet they continue to waste lots of money on it every time, and you think it is very okay.”

Now,, I have some few questions for you..

1. If IREV-PORTAL is not allowed in the Electoral-Act-2022, and yet INEC continues to operate it, is INEC not supposed to be considered as going above the law?

2. Isn't it a total waste of the nation’s scarce funds (embezzlement is actually the right word) for INEC to be operating a “mere viewing portal”, whereas there is no Nigerian Laws that is backing-up the so-called “viewing portal”?

3. Can you show any proof that any other type of “Electronic Register of Election Results” apart from the so-called IREV-PORTAL is existing, and that INEC actually restricted it from public knowledge -- yet it is in existence?

4. If it is established that the INEC actually have any other type of “Electronic Register of Election Results” which is separate from the IREV-PORTAL, why then are they still wasting money to be operating the IREV-PORTAL which is not a part of the Electoral Laws, rather than maintaining and running only the “Electronic Register of Election Results” which is already Legally existing?

5. If it is established that the INEC does Not have any other type of “Electronic Register of Election Results” apart from the so-called IREV-PORTAL, doesn't it now mean that the INEC is totally going against the Section-62(2-&-3) of the Electoral-Act-2022 in all ramifications by operating a so-called illegal portal?

6. Why did the supreme court judges in the judgement of Atiku-vs-INEC/Tinubu/APC-(2023) equated the “IREV-PORTAL” to the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” of the Section-62(2) of the Electoral-Act-2022.?

7. The BVAS-MACHINE is not mentioned in the Electoral-Act-2022. What is mentioned is “Smart-Card Reader or any other technological device deployed for accreditation of voters”. Yet, the Judges interpreted the line to also include BVAS-MACHINES. Does it mean that the Judges cannot also interpret the Section-62(2) to also mean the IREV-PORTAL?

8. According to the term “REGISTER” and what “Register” is supposed to mean and serve, is the “National Electronic Register of Election Results” supposed to be Restricted From View? According to what Registers are supposed to be, are they supposed to be hidden from public view?

I don't think we need these long misunderstanding. Everyone can read and understand whatever is written in the act and how it's being stated.

From what you wrote, it's clear Irev is different from electronic register and that is the reason they are given different names. Simple. Constitution hardly make mistakes in detailings and considerations before conclusions.

INEC is a curse to itself & Nigeria and is the biggest threat to Nigeria’s democracy.

aieromon:
The IREV is merely a public viewing portal and not an electronic register.

All parties have access to the certified true copies of result sheets. An electronic register will still remain restricted and not open to the public.

This you stated is the opinion of a corupt Nigerian judge... A compromised one

Now answer this question

Why will a govt spent huge mutibillions to create a system just for viewership..?

Why will this viewership site not corrollate with final results when it corrollate with results on ground..?

Why is there a need for a viewership site..?

If you can't get theses answers , and u still believe it's purpose is for viewership, then u need to be rescued from duldrums

BluntCrazeMan:
IS THE “IREV-PORTAL” MENTIONED IN THE ELECTORAL ACT 2022?

In this topic, I will X-Ray the so-called “IREV-PORTAL” of the INEC.

In this topic, we will determine whether the “IREV-PORTAL” is against the Nigerian Electoral Laws or Not.

Swearing in a purported winner as president before the election petition is over is a fraud which must be removed from the constitution before 2027.

"National Electronic Register of Election Results”.
That's same as a portal where votes received through electronic transmission from polling boots are registered for storage.

Yakubu Mahmood simply set aside the Electora Act of 2022 in order to use manual collation of votes to APPOINT his party's presidential candidate as winner.

All these electoral issues are non-issue simply the power that be are not ready to implement electoral reforms that will revolutionalize electioneering and consequently democratic processes.

phemray:
..... Irev is different from electronic register and that is the reason they are given different names...

The question is still simple..

Why will INEC spend lots of money on the IREV-PORTAL that is not in our laws,, yet TOTALLY IGNORES the ELECTRONIC REGISTER which is FULLY LEGAL.??

WHAT KIND OF CRIMINALITY IS THAT NAA.??


Then Again,, if Smart-Card Reader is what the Laws allowed, how come BVAS-MACHINES are also Legal even though they were not mentioned in the Electoral Laws?

PigTormentor:
Exactly, all parties had agents at polling units where they had to sign the result sheets.
That's more important than IREV.
Show us result sheets that differ from what INEC reported.
That's what's important. Any computer system can be hacked or even malfunction.
Even in the US, whenever therr is an election dispute, they always go back to the real papers for recount.

Guess what ? I took a picture of the result sheet of my polling unit and checked on irev after elections . Guess what it was correct. Let anyone who has proof that the polling unit results changed present discrepancies .

If polling units are rigged during elections , how did the party reps sign? ! Lets assume that they were bribed, is that inec's fault ?

ejimatic:
Constitution supercedes the Act



The SC subsisting judgments on IREV have relegated it to the second place.It is irrelevant in our election.In fact it is a waste of time.
So it is for ever.

The Judges would always say that what was presented to them by the parties would always be what they would Judge on.

That doesn't mean that all those other issues which they didn't pass judgement on would now be judged by the same judgement of the issues which were already judged by them.

If the IREV-PORTAL is relegated to the second place, does it mean that it is FAKE.??

I need answers.!!

You mentioned the Constitution.??
Is there anywhere the Act went against the Constitution with regards to the issue of IREV-PORTAL.??

CaptainFM1:
Who cares if it's mention or not, when riggers will still tell their opponents to go to court knowing fully well that the judges will do their biddings.

This is exactly what I am trying to do with this thread 🧵 🪡

To let us know that the JUDGES told lies in the past by saying that the Electoral Act doesn't support IREV-PORTAL..

But even at that, if it is the truth that the Electoral Act doesn't really support the IREV-PORTAL,, WHY THEN IS THE INEC STILL USING THE IREV-PORTAL AGAIN.??


We are not all stoopiid.!!

I am doing this so that we trash-out this topic fully.

Let it be an isolated issue to be determined in one of these upcoming Petitions,, so that we know where we stand on this issue, and let them pronounce how useless the IREV-PORTAL really is.

And therefore, INEC would have to stop using the so-called IREV-PORTAL and actually set up the “National Electronic Register of Results” and start using it -- if the judges say so.

BluntCrazeMan:
The Judges would always say that what was presented by the parties would always be what they would Judge on.

If the IREV-PORTAL is relegated to the second place, does that make it FAKE.??

I need answers.!!

You mentioned the Constitution.??
Is there anywhere the Act went against the Constitution with regards to the issue of IREV-PORTAL.??

The Constitution is silent on IREV

The emphasis is on the original results as contained in EC8.

All other results in IREV are not reliable according to the SC judgments for they can be tampered with.

ejimatic:
The Constitution is silent on IREV

That is where Electoral Act Comes in.

The emphasis is on the original results as contained in EC8.

Emphasis is also on the methods for cross-checking those same EC8As

All other results in IREV are not reliable according to the SC judgments for they can be tampered with.

Relax.
We are talking about future petitioners here.
Not some past cases and Judgements.

parags:
Guess what ? I took a picture of the result sheet of my polling unit and checked on irev after elections . Guess what it was correct. Let anyone who has proof that the polling unit results changed present discrepancies .

If polling units are rigged during elections , how did the party reps sign? ! Lets assume that they were bribed, is that inec's fault ?

When Obi went to court, I was expecting him to come with hundreds of polling result papers showing different results from what INEC reported.

He could not because he couldn't find any. He truly lost hence Obi and Atiku were looking for other reasons to disqualify Tinubu.

Are you supporting this retrogressive system because you want your unpopular candidate to be able to rig or you just hate Nigeria's electoral progress?

aieromon:
The IREV is merely a public viewing portal and not an electronic register.

All parties have access to the certified true copies of result sheets. An electronic register will still remain restricted and not open to the public.

You don't know how election petition is done. If you bring 1000 polling units out of 177,000 polling units nationwide, the judges will tell you its insignificant. However, to proven just this 1000 polling units, you need 1000 polling unit agents as witness and you're given 2 weeks, something that cannot be done in 3 months. You don't know the process else you'll appreciate how difficult it is to prove entire Nigeria under 1 month

It is this difficulty that why electronic transmission and collation should be mandatory

PigTormentor:
When Obi went to court, I was expecting him to come with hundreds of polling result papers showing different results from what INEC reported.

He could not because he couldn't find any. He truly lost hence Obi and Atiku were looking for other reasons to disqualify Tinubu.

I still believe that the 2023 presidential election was systematically rigged in favor of the ruling party. The so called INEC sold a dummy inform of IReV portal to the opposition party. They made them believed that the election results was going to be online realtime, but at end what did we get? Even if the presidential election was not rigged in the first place, that singular act of failed IReV during the transmission of the presidential election result alone made a lot of people believes the election was rigged!

DMerciful:
You don't know how election petition is done. If you bring 1000 polling units out of 177,000 polling units nationwide, the judges will tell you its insignificant. However, to proven just this 1000 polling units, you need 1000 polling unit agents as witness and you're given 2 weeks, something that cannot be done in 3 months. You don't know the process else you'll appreciate how difficult it is to prove entire Nigeria under 1 month

It is this difficulty that why electronic transmission and collation should be mandatory

So with 3 months, LP couldn't have their polling agents to submit the result sheets that differ from what INEC reported?
In fact, you don't need thousands of results.
Obi could have shown just about 100 such false results, that have given his case a boost on social media in the courts.
At the very least, show us at least 100 of such false results instead of claiming that you.won but can't show any prove.
It will only take weeks for all LP agents to submit result papers where the INEC results differs from what was signed for.
Pls that's a lame excuse.