₦airaland Forum

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.

creativejagaban:
...

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 ..

bigpicture001:
Why is there a need for a viewership site..?

BluntCrazeMan:
That is where Electoral Act Comes in.

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


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

FavouriteOfGod:
The irev portal is supposed to make a whole lot of the electiontionering process easier and better.

Racoon:
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.

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

PigTormentor:
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.

Abbeytoy:
IREV is just like placing a Big TV screen at some strategic places for people to see how things are going, Eg viewing centers across Lagos garages.

I believe it's an inec initiative

BluntCrazeMan:
You really don't know how the Nigerian Judges had stated that they wanted the cases to be proved.

They want 176,000+ human beings to come as witnesses to the court.
NOT JUST 176,000+ results..
But also 176,000+ human witnesses.

BluntCrazeMan:
The question here is,, that thing you're viewing on the screen,, is it the real event or FAKE.??

((..And if it is FAKE, why still continuing with it??))

HRTOFAKNG:
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!

PigTormentor:
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.

Abbeytoy:
Real or fake how?

PigTormentor:
Forget about judges, show the world hundreds of result papers that are different from what INEC declared. If you can do that, even thr judges will be concerned. You have to show enough that could have changed the eventual results.
The problem is that Obi didn't even show any because he couldn't find any.
I can guarantee you that Obi and his mob would have pasted all over social media for the world to see if they have just 10 10 result sheets that differs from what INEC eventually reported. Their antecedents tells me that would have been the case.

PigTormentor:
Forget about judges, show the world hundreds of result papers that are different from what INEC declared. If you can do that, even thr judges will be concerned. You have to show enough that could have changed the eventual results.
The problem is that Obi didn't even show any because he couldn't find any.
I can guarantee you that Obi and his mob would have pasted all over social media for the world to see if they have just 10 10 result sheets that differs from what INEC eventually reported. Their antecedents tells me that would have been the case.

Kukutente23:
This is a lie
A lot of you have been fed lies from APC propaganda Mills
Obi presented results in court from Rivers and Benue especially showing that the elections were rigged in those two states
He also called a forensic expert to show the court that some documents were forged

BluntCrazeMan:
That is where Electoral Act Comes in.




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




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

PigTormentor:
Lair lair pants on fire. No he did not show in court where result sheets from his agent is different from what was released by INEC. You must have been brainwashed by your fellow Obidient lies and false narratives.
I watched the proceedings and was waiting for him to present such evidence. He did not.

HRTOFAKNG:
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!

fergie001:
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:
Thank you for this subject matter.

....

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.

BluntCrazeMan:
That is where Electoral Act Comes in.




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




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

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.

AK481:
Why did you use "national register " and not national electronic register " , that's a deliberate ommission to drive your point ?

seunmsg:
You can cross check form EC8As at the ward collation level. In fact, BVAS machines and IREV were used in a lot of the ward collation level and that is where a lot of results were invalidated for over voting and rerun ordered.

...It is practically impossible to use IREV or even BVAS machines to realistically cross check EC8A results anymore...
...

....Same applies to the state level collation....

IREV is a viewing portal and not a collation platform.

There are different forms for different level of collation. Cross checking can be done at different levels using actual rules, copies given to agents, copies given to police, BVAS machines (at the ward level only) and IREV (where uploads are available). These are the options available under the law for cross checking at different levels of collation and not just IREV.

BluntCrazeMan:
Which election did this thing you are saying now happened in.??

Because I am sure it didn't happen in Edo State or Ondo..
Nor did it happen in Kogi or Bayelsa or Imo.

So, I need to know which election you're talking about here exactly.!!





I need you to find the Electoral-Act-2022..
Find Section-64(6) read it very well, and also read sub-paragraphs (a,b,c,d)...
Then come back and re-read sub-paragraph-(b) again.




First of all,, stop misquoting me here.

I did not type at any point that IREV is a Collation Platform, so don't force it inside my comments.
If you are assuming that I meant it, then state it that you're assuming that I meant that IREV is a Collation Platform, then I can tell you exactly what I meant the IREV to be.


Secondly, like I always asked other people....
I will also ask you the same question..

If the viewing platform is useless, and it serves no purpose, and the people who are supposed to be the ones viewing it are no more interested in viewing it again -- since it is so useless,, why is the INEC still operating it? (Being that not even our laws support it)





In response to the emboldened statements...

I need you to read the Section-64(6) of the Electoral-Act-2022 very well again..
There is a reason why the Electoral-Act said these words:
“......dispute regarding a collated result or the result of an election from any polling unit, the collation officer or returning officer shall use.......”

After digesting the statement above,, then read the sub-paragraphs-(a,b,c,d)

BluntCrazeMan:
Can we now both agree that INEC is committing a serious breach of the Electoral-Act-2022 by not deploying the supposed actual “NATIONAL ELECTRONIC REGISTER OF ELECTION RESULTS”, and putting it into use as required under Section-62(2-&-3) of the Electoral Act??

Secondly, can we both also agree that INEC is embezzling and wasting lots of funds by deploying the IREV-PORTAL which has no backing of the law?
(If the IREV-PORTAL is not necessary in our electoral system, then we don't need it.
It should be scrapped and be replaced with something which the law supports).

THE USE OF THE IREV-PORTAL SHOULD BE DISCONTINUED -- UNTIL IT HAS A PLACE IN THE ELECTORAL LAWS..

IT'S VERY SIMPLE..

fergie001:
There is what we call a National Electronic Register of Results which is obtainable at the INEC Headquarters. This Register contains all election results from 1999 excluding I think 2003 or 2007, one of them. They are all been stored there so if it's needed I think INEC can provide that, on request for research purposes, etc.

For the IReV, just take it that it isn't useful. what is useful to the Courts in today's Nigeria is the BVAS for accreditation BECAUSE it is embedded in the Electoral Act itself. What IReV does is to boost public confidence but that is relative.

To be fair to INEC, in 2022, they proposed electronic transmission of results to be in the Electoral Act but the lawmakers, esp the APC opposed and voted against it. Infact, the NCC said only 50% coverage can be covered by our network and not advisable.

So, the most important people in our elections today, is the Police and the PU agents but we all know how the Police works, so PU agents have a very BIG role to play. A copy of Form EC8A is given to the Police, another to each of the PU agents and also uploaded to IReV. Knowing how the system works, the Candidate's PU agent is very important..... That's how Natasha won. Her agents were able to produce duplicate copies of Form EC8A-E, so the manipulation was clearly visible.