₦airaland Forum

Sojourner1976:
How does your bring Obedient or Batist affect proceedings at the PEPT or negate the truth contained in the Tribune article?

what in tribune is not the truth just another opinion from a random or paid journalist who dwell on social media dominated by a section of a country to do his write up

An

Still available

Still Available

Still available

Two witnesses of the Labour Party (LP) and Peter Obi contradicted themselves yesterday on the conditions to be met by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) before deploying technology.
A cyber security expert, Dr. Chibuike Ugwuoke, said it was a statutory requirement under the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) Act that technologies to be deployed by INEC must meet the ISO 27001 2013 standard.

He added that INEC must first obtain authorisation from NITDA to deploy such technologies.


But, the Head of the Legal Services Department at NITDA, Emmanuel Edet, said such requirements do not exist under the NITDA Act.

“The NITDA Act does not contain any cyber security standard code – ISO 27001 2013,” Edet told the tribunal.

Ugwuoke and Edet were subpoenaed by Obi and the LP to testify before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

Ugwuoke, who said he was engaged by the petitioners to investigate information on INEC Results Viewing (IREV) portal, had tendered his report on Wednesday, in which he claimed to have discovered multiple uploads and strange objects instead of results.

Under cross-examination yesterday by INEC’s lawyer Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), he insisted on his claim that ISO 27001 2013 was a statutory minimum standard requirement for any organisation intending to deploy technologies.

Although Ugwuoke claimed not to know the Section, he said what he wrote in his statement was copied from the Act.

Ugwuoke said the petitioners recruited him on March 10; that produced a preliminary report on March 17/18 and the final report in mid-May.

Edet, while being led by petitioners’ lawyer, Patrick Ikwueto (SAN), said his agency did not have documents requested by Obi and the LP, concerning the permission granted to INEC to deploy technologies for election and the status of the technologies.

He said the NITDA Act did not contain any requirements about ISO 27001 2013 on cyber security.

The witness also said no provision in their Act makes reference to INEC.

Edet confirmed that the claim by the former Communication and Digital Economy Minister Isa Pantami that there were about 16 million attempts to hack INEC IT infrastructure during the last presidential election emanated from his agency (NITDA).

Earlier, Hitler Uwala, an expert witness called by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, admitted there were errors in the forensic report he produced for Atiku and his party.

Testifying as the 26th petitioners’ witness, he played down the errors by describing them as “title errors.”

Under cross-examination by the lawyer of President Bola Tinubu, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), Uwala admitted discrepancies in his report about the actual number of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines he examined.

The hearing continues at 9am.

https://thenationonlineng.net/lp-obis-witnesses-contradict-each-other-at-election-tribunal/

Still Available for sell

[b][/b]

mariahAngel:
Probably because they cross boundaries when allowed too much liberty in other (people's) countries.

Take for instance the other guy that went to Ghana to try nonsense with their women...

. If you check the so called Nigerians you will find out 98% are igbos they never respect and be at peace with their host

franchasofficia:
You guys don't seem to understand the difference.



Kenya transmitted raw figures, while Yakubu said INEC will only transmit snapped image of polling unit results direct from polling units to iREV in realtime (meaning as soon as voting and counting ends in each polling unit), so mark the difference.



What it means is that Kenya did their own result collation electronically which their electoral law had provision for but Nigeria's electoral law doesn't permit electronic collation of election result which they claim can be hacked, understood. But transmitting snapped polling unit election result to INEC's server known as iREV is not result collation, it is for public credibility purpose and to guard against rigging of results during final manual collation since Nigerians can do manual collation using the originally uploaded snapped polling unit results on iREV to check for discrepancies with final result announced by INEC.


So this is where the problem is and where INEC used to rig the election because snapped polling unit result sheets of NASS election conducted same time with Presidential election were being uploaded and transmitted successfully on realtime to INEC's iREV (result viewing online portal) on the election day but Presidential election own wasn't going through, which tells you there was something fishy.


Nobody expected INEC to transmit the raw figures counted from polling units, what we expected is the snapped polling unit results uploaded and transmitted to iREV direct from every polling unit as done in Osun state.



You can hack raw figure transmission but you cannot hack snapped picture of polling unit result which must be the original INEC result sheet from polling unit bearing the signatures of each party's polling unit agent; APC, LP, PDP, NNPP, others.



Hope you understand the difference now?

. Inec says it will upload snapped result sheet not transmit , transmit is different from upload
Upload and transfer is synonymous which means you may not view it real time but transmit means you will view it real time inec did upload but not transmit in this context that's what inec chairman clarifies but the headless mob are one way traffic in nature ,

Any thing igbo people support always end in failure ,experience and history shows it, bunch of chest beaters and loud mouthed people , I spit on their graves !

IamV:
This is the Tribune Newspaper of 23rd February 2023.
INEC RIGHTLY noted that RAW FIGURES won't be transmitted of election results.

PLEASE DOES IT MEAN INEC SAID THEY WILL NOT TRANSMIT PICTURES OF ELECTION RESULTS DIRECTLY FROM POLLING UNIT?

. What is inside the pictures ? Is it not figures ?

senatordave1:
Another fumbling.how will you analyze unit results without analysing ward and lga results to see if it adds up?

.

There are some things going on in Court IamV is withholding here he only type what he want you to know

A ten

gabbytabby:
*ELO F’OKAN BALE*

Good Morning all.
I personally argued this appeal from the trial court to the Supremw Court. I was at the Supreme Court on Monday when the appeal was heard and argued same. Judgement is reserved for Friday 26th.
The issue in the appeal is very narrow. The PDP had sued APC, Tinubu and Shettima at the Federal High Court contending that Shettima had been nominated in two constituencies. We filed our counter affidavit which clearly showed otherwise. We also filed a preliminary objection that PDP lacked locus standi to bring the suit; that the suit was an abuse of court process, that it was caught by the doctrine of re judicature and disclosed no cause of action. The FHC upheld our objection and dismissed the suit for lack of locus. PDP appealed to the Court of Appeal challenging the ruling of the FHC that they lack locus and the Court upheld the decision of the FHC and dismissed the appeal with 5 million Naira costs against PDP.
They then appealed to the Supreme Court. At the Supreme Court they attempt3d to argue fresh issues that were not in issue at the court of appeal including asking rhe SC to invoke its powers to hear the matter on merit. We filed our Respondent brief along with a Notice of Preliminary objection that the appeal is incompetent and that the SC lack jurisdiction to even assume the powers of the Federal High Court to hear the matter as the issue that was before the court of appeal and determined was on locus standi. We further argued that the suit at the lower court was already statute barred and the SC cannot even hear same outside the 180 days prescribed by the constitution. The court laid two posers to Joe Agi, SAN to answer to convince them on locus and that even if the SC assumes jurisdiction, the case is already statute barred and will be academic. He had no answer for the posers. I argued that the only issue before the court of appeal was on locus and they cannot even be heard to appeal a decision that didn't emanate from the court below. I also argued that the aSC lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal as constituted. The court didn't even hear the merit of the case on double nomination as it was not in issue.
The court after taking arguments adjourned to Friday 26th for judgement.
So I don't know where all the social media reportage of a non existing issue of determination of Shettima's eligibility is coming from. Its all just a social media hype to heat up the system and create public apprehension.
As we await the SC decision please be assure that our case is unassailable in law.
Like I noted, I personally handled and argued the appeal from the Federal High Court to the Supreme Court.

Babatunde Ogala SAN

. Good to have you on this forum sir

All these court cases against a single man , are they not ashamed of themselves? in fact Tinubu na man you be

We are happy for this

Its fake news the news has been doctored and rewrite by the obedient to make them feel good pls paste the source let's check to authenticate it

L

KanwuliaExtra:
Let him use his wheel-chair to move backwards on his past judgement.
APCheats have agreed there was a criminal forfeiture.
They are now singing that : IT HAPPENED OVER 10 YEARS AGO and NIGERIA HAS NO JURISDICTION OVER THE MATTER.

See all the passports in his hands?
Ready to JAPA as soon as he commits his own judicial blunder!

Just looking at him alone. . . you can tell he is a member of several DIABOLICAL CULTS all over Nigeria.
What a DIRTY, SHABBY and SHADY fellow.

See the 'blood-shot' eyes? Dis one is alway on HEROINE for sure!

THE MOST UNKEMPT CJN NIGERIA EVER SAW. . . TWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!

. Check your father first before you insult another man father

BERNIMOORE:
They said it..that you can't support Tinubu and reason well again...
So when they freeze your account who is affected? Do you fill a form that you own the account and liable to any penalty' that result from illegal use of your own bank account?... Is there another Bola Tinubu joined as defendant?...

. If you Innocently received a stolen property and and it is proof that you don't know its a stolen property
If you forfeit it to the court
Pls are you a criminal ?

North4Obi23:
Rephrase this. I can tell you it's not making sense at all.

. If you innocently receive a stolen property and keep it , if the stolen property is found in your custody and the judge deliver a judgment that the property be forfeited after establish that you innocently receive the stolen property
Can we Call you a Criminal ?

Highways:
The Brits made an online apology... We need a documented apology...

where is the link to the Online apology ? Post it here

Obidient will put Obi into more trouble against British Authority

Diran Onifade quickly debunk it

I laugh in Swahili

9jahotblog:
Good judgement from the CJN Ariwoola. We await another judgement that relate to it in the presidential election petition too in the Supreme Court of justice.

. If you receive a stolen money umknowingly from a friend who later found to be theif and the stolen cash was found in ur custody
If the matter get to court and your criminal friend and other witnesses testifies that you innocently kept the money for him without knowing its from criminal activities and the judge asked that the money be forfeited
Pls can we call you a criminal ?

BERNIMOORE:
Tinubu is a defendant in the drug case
A defendant is a certified party to a proven case especially when he forfeit a designated amount pronounced in a judgement.. That solidify the fact that he is a bonafide party to the Case


What did Tinubu paid for if he is not a party?

Festus keyamo thinks that the appeal court tribunals judges will allow him to do Abracadabra by tossing them around flip flopping and dangling law technicalities to waste the plaintiff's time...

Obviously the Tinubu team wants to use delay tactics to delay the case using technicalities and Nigerians are watching if those delay tactics will be granted..

Below is a certified documents

USA court of Illinois Northern District

VS
Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

How do we define someone who is a party again?

. Read what you posted the document says USA. Vs. Money Founds in heritage bank in the name of bola tinubu
It didn't say USA vs Bola tinubu
Thank God I Zoom the document don't confuse people jor

OfficialAPCNig:
Have you read Wole Olanipekun SAN response to Labour Party petition?

Has our learned SAN scammed Tinubu and APC?

It seems the almighty Wole Olanipekun SAN, overated Olujimi and Fagbemi have scammed baba ooh?

Even a First Year Law student in Kwara State University will never put up that defence against Ikpeazu SAN 100-page petition against APC, bearing in mind that according to the electoral 2022, only a presidential candidate of LP can challenge PO membership of the LP and again, Obaseki of PDP was screened in APC and disqualified, before defected to PDP.

Justice for Tinubu.

. Lateef fagbemi is APC lawyer the preliminary objection he raised is allowed in law this case has to be disposed first before election petition case will start and he is different from Wole Olanipekun Tinubu lawyer which is yet to respond to obi petition Obidient pls take it easy and read to understand issues before jumping on social media pls don't be the headless mob that they call you

seanfer:
Wole Olaonipekun is yet to file his client's response, it's funny people don't know the difference between APC's response as a party in the suit and Tinubu's response... Olaonipekun will file is client's response before friday.

Thank you jare the youth of now a days find it difficult to read and understand , Lateef Fagbemi is APC lawyer and he is the one raising a preliminary objection here on behalf of APC to determine the merit of Obi petition , this is another case to be disposed first before the election petition could be heard , Wole Olanipekun on the other hand is the lawyer to Tinubu and he is yet to file in his responses , Obidient don't read to understand that's why they call them Headless mob' imagine taking fagbemi to be olanipekun

IfnobeGod20:
It seems some of you are just too ignorant of the happening. Obi case wasn't about over voting but suppression of votes. Let me simplify it for you for more understanding. For example:
In A state if the votes got by each party are as follows:
APC - 120
LP - 30
PDP - 60
But party with dubious structure went to suppress the votes as thus:
APC - 140
LP - 10
PDP - 60

If you look at it the number of registered voters still stand at 210 buy there is permutation and combination. This was dictated in 21 states of the federation.
You people should try and be calming down and comprehend issues. That's exactly Peter Obi case, aside other issues he raised. So it is quite different from Adeleke's/ Oyetola's case. Their own is talking of over voting but Peter Obi is talking of suppression of votes.

I have not really read Atiku's petition buy your reference to Obi own is faulty and not the same with what you submitted here.

.
Shut up this is the meaning of voters. Suppression below as done in governorship election in Lagos
Not this nonsense u typed above