Tag: INEC

INEC announces date for fresh elections in 59 polling units

Following issues of irregularities and violence, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared fresh elections in 59 polling units within the Ogori/Magongo Local Government Area of Kogi State. The Commission confirmed the rescheduled election is set to take place next Saturday, November 18, 2023. This decision was disclosed in a statement on Sunday night by the INEC National Commissioner, Mohammed Haruna. It was reported that certain polling locations in Kogi experienced a suspension of the election due to completed result sheets prior to the voting commencement. INEC clarified that this action doesn’t compromise its dedication to investigating the trail of personnel and materials to identify any involvement in undermining the process, promising appropriate sanctions as necessary. “The most critical incident occurred in nine out of 10 Wards in Ogori/Magongo Local Government Area (LGA). “ Election in the other nine Wards (Eni, Okibo, Okesi, Ileteju, Aiyeromi, Ugugu, Obinoyin, Obatgben and Oturu) involving 59 Polling Units and 15,136 registered voters remain suspended,” part of the statement read. The commission said it acted “In line with Section 24(3) of the Electoral Act 2022 and Clause 59 of INEC Regulations and Guidelines on the Conduct of Elections 2022, a fresh election will be held on Saturday 18th November 2023 in the affected Polling Units.”

Obi’s counsel lambasts INEC over absence of witness in court

Dr Levi Uzoukwu (SAN), the leading counsel to the Labour Party (LP) and Peter Obi has blasted Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for showing a lack of preparation in defending its case at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPC). Uzoukwu made this comment on Monday, shortly after the court adjourned its resumed sitting, following the absence of INEC’s first defence witness.

Dr Levi Uzoukwu (SAN) The PEPC was forced to adjourn after the first of three witnesses scheduled to appear on behalf of INEC failed to appear allegedly on account of what the commission cited as domestic issues. Speaking to newsmen just outside the court, the LP lawyer said his camp has a strong case and are ready to move on with their case, unlike the INEC that has continued to show inconsistencies. “Given the contradictions and inconsistencies and what INEC has done; I’m sure they are not ready to defend this case. “I stand to be proven wrong, but I would wish that they defend this matter so that the public will see more things of what happened to this election,” he told Channels Television While reiterating that Nigeria has never had an election like the February 25th presidential poll, the legal counsel stressed that it is the INEC’s choice to either call a witness or witnesses, adding that he and his client the LP, are ready at all times. It would be recalled that at the mention of the case around 9:30 am, lawyer to INEC, Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), told the court that although his client planned to call three witnesses within three days, the one slated for today was unavailable on account of domestic issues. Lawyers to other parties in the case – Livy Uzoukwu (SAN) for Obi/LP, Wole Olanipekun (SAN) for President Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettma, and Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) for the All Progressives Congress (APC), did not object to the request by the INEC lawyer.

Absence counsel Court INEC lambasts Obis Witness

How INEC deleted presidential election results from BVAS – Expert

A witness of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has told the Presidential Election Petition Court, (PEPC) that the Independent Electoral Commission, INEC, deleted Presidential Election results on all the 110 BVAS machines he inspected. Mr Hitler Nwala, a subpoenaed witness, made the assertion on Thursday in Abuja while giving evidence as an expert witness for the petitioners in their petition challenging the outcome of the Feb. 25 presidential election results.

A collage photo of the INEC Chairman, Mahmood Yakubu and an official holding BVAS The witness who was led in evidence by the petitioner’s lead counsel, Mr Chris Uche, SAN, said that the machines inspected were only those from the Federal Capital Territory, (FCT). He also told the court that he was a Digital Forensic Analyst and that he didn’t know at what point the results were deleted on machines. Under cross-examination by counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC), Mr Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, the witness said that he attached a standard device used for such an exercise to the machine to arrive at the conclusion. When asked if he had the authority of the commission to attach an external device to the BVAS machine, the witness answered in the affirmative. Mahmoud further asked the witness if he was aware that inspecting only 110 machines out of 3,163 that were deployed in the FCT amounted to only 3.4 per cent of the total number of BVAS deployed in the FCT and 0.06 per cent of BVAS deployed nationwide. To this, the witness told the court that he only compiled the report and didn’t take out time to calculate the percentages. The INEC counsel attempted to give a BVAS machine to the witness to check if it was deleted as he had said in his report. The witness, however, said that it would be against the ethics of his profession to collect the BVAS machine in open court to check it. “It is professionally wrong to access a device that will be used as evidence in a court of competent jurisdiction because it will temper with the evidence. “We cannot access the device directly, what we do is to extract the evidence and take it for analysis.” Moreover, the witness told the court that since all the devices had the same model and looked the same on the outside, he couldn’t tell if it was one of the ones he inspected by merely looking at it. For his part, counsel to the All Progressives Congress, (APC) Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN told the witness that neither he nor any of his team members signed the six-volume forensic report. The witness, however, insisted that he signed the report as well as the certificate of compliance. On his part, counsel to President Bola Tinubu, Mr Wole Olanipekun, SAN confronted the witness with a portion of his report where he said that from his inspection of the machines, “nothing was intrinsically wrong with them”. “Were you in Abuja on the day of the presidential election? “If you were not in Abuja, how then can you know that there was nothing intrinsically wrong with the machines on the day of the election?” The witness said that he was not in Abuja and so he couldn’t have known if something went wrong with the machines on the day of the election. After the witness was discharged, the petitioners went further to tender Forms EC8A series from 20 local government areas of Ogun, 17 local government areas of Ondo, 27 local government areas of Jigawa, and 20 local government areas of Rivers. The Chairman of the court, Justice Haruna Tsammani adjourned the hearing of the petition until Friday. The News Agency of Nigeria, (NAN) reports that going by the pre-hearing report; Atiku and the PDP are expected to close their case on Friday. NAN reports that they had asked for three weeks to present their case which elapsed on Tuesday but because they had lost three days, one being the June 12 Democracy Day Public Holiday, the court extended their time by three days.

BVAS Deleted Election Expert INEC presidential results

INEC claims Peter Obi is asking for non-existent documents in petition against Tinubu

The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, has claimed that some documents requested by the presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) at the 2023 election, Mr Peter Obi to be presented as exhibits at the Presidential Election Tribunal are non-existent. Obi and the Labour Party (LP) are challenging the Feb. 25 election of President Bola Tinubu before the court in a petition marked CA/PEPC/03/2023.

Peter Obi and INEC Chairman Respondents in the petition are INEC, President Tinubu, Vice-President Kashim Shettima and their All Progressives Congress (APC). Giving evidence before the court, Mr Lawrence Bayode, Deputy Director, ICT at INEC told the court that out of the five documents Obi asked for; two were non-existent, while one was work in progress. One of Obi’s witnesses, Ms Loretta Ogah, an ICT cloud engineer, said she contested election into the House of Representatives on the platform of Labour Party in Cross River, but lost the election. Ogah was cross-examined by Mr Wole Olanipakun (SAN), counsel for Tinubu and Shettima. She told the court that she sued INEC after her loss because the electoral umpire did not list her name on its portal as a result of network failure. Also cross-examined by Mr Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), counsel for APC, Ogah told the court that glitches did not occur on INEC portal on Feb. 25. She said she did not know INEC’s password protocol as she was not INEC’s employee. The court presided over by Justice Haruna Tsammani, adjourned further hearing to Wednesday.

claims documents INEC nonexistent Obi PETER petition TINUBU

“INEC deliberately delaying proceedings, refusing to provide documents we asked for” ― Peter Obi’s counsel cries out

"INEC deliberately delaying proceedings, refusing to provide documents we asked for" ― Peter Obi cries out

The Labour Party and its presidential candidate, Mr Peter Obi on Monday alleged that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is deliberately delaying proceedings by refusing to provide the documents they asked for. Obi and the LP are petitioners in the petition marked CA/PEPC/03/2023 challenging the election of President Bola Tinubu.

Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi Respondents are Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) president Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima and All Progressives Congress (APC). The LP and Obi told the Presidential Election Petition Court that due to INEC ‘s refusal to provide them the documents they asked for, they can’t go on with their case. Mr Jubrin Okutepa, counsel for the LP, told the court that all the documents his client asked for from INEC were not provided. ” We are bringing this to your notice for your intervention because we have done everything humanly possible. ” This afternoon, INEC released few IreV reports from Lagos and Gombe. ” These documents were certified since May 29. We have severally written letters detailing the documents we needed as proof of our petition. ” We have paid for most of these documents, “he said. He further informed the court that it appears that INEC was deliberately delaying proceedings. Mr Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN counsel for INEC, told the court that he received a letter dated May 15 from the petitioners and has not received any other letter after that. ” All the documents that the subpoenaed witnesses are tendering were provided by INEC. We never denied the petitioners any document. “I am a senior counsel and know the importance of this matter. They should stop this lamentation, ” he said. Mr Wole Olanipakun, SAN counsel for Tinubu and Shettima promised to ensure that a meeting between senior counsel holds to address the issues raised. The court urged them to come to a better understanding so that the proceeding can go on smoothly as they pledged in their spirit of cooperation. The petitioners through their counsel, Patrick Ikweato, SAN brought their seventh witness (PW 7) to come and testify. The subpoenaed witness, Loretta Ogah, is an architect with Amazon Web Services Incorporated (AWS) At the point of adopting her witness statement on oath, the respondents objected. Mahmoud, told the court that the petitioners just served them with the documents. ” I will not be in the position to examine the witness today, I need to study the documents ” he said. Olanipakun also objected to adoption of the witness statement. ” We are not saying that the witness should not go on with her evidence,” he said. The petitioners tendered the witness’s employment letter by Amazon and her resumé and were admitted in evidence. Also admitted were six reports showing the health status of AWS dashboard of cloud services in 33 regions and certificates of compliance. Meanwhile, the five-member panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani adjourned until Tuesday for the cross-examination of the witness and further hearing of the petition.

asked counsel cries delaying deliberately documents INEC Obis PETER Proceedings provide refusing

“Arrest Malami, INEC Chairman, Hadi Sirika or release Bawa”

Following the suspension of the former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emefiele and that of the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC Abdulrasheed Bawa, Nigerians on social media space are calling for the arrest and prosecution of the former Attorney General of the Federation, AGF, Abubakar Malami, alleging that he also indulged in corrupt practices while in power. They also called on the president to arrest the former minister of aviation, Hadi Sirika over his involvement in the establishment of Nigeria Air which has been tagged as a fraudulent act by some lawmakers. Former AGF, Abubakar Malami The Chairman of the Independent Electoral Commission, INEC, Mahmood Yakubu was also called out for alleged rigging in the 2023 general election that peaked Tinubu to victory against others. Recall that PresidentTinubu through the office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, SGF, announced the suspension of Emefiele and Bawa. Explaining the reason behind Emefiele’s suspension, the Director of Information, Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Willie Bassey disclosed that the suspension of the CBN governor was based on an ongoing investigation as well as planned reforms in Nigeria’s financial sector. On Bawa’s suspension, Willie Basse said was based on weighty allegations of abuse of office levelled against him and also to allow for proper investigation into his conduct while in office. Some Nigerians who called on Tinubu to also arrest Malami wrote on their Twitter handles, @shehu_mahdi: “ARREST MALAMI OR RELEASE BAWA BECAUSE: He nominated him. He supervised him. He is the cabal at the centre. He has a tie with Failed PMB. He prosecuted selectively. He discharged & acquitted at will. He became DEBT collector. He negotiated & huge government debt. “He paid those debts exclusively. He needs to explain how he suddenly became mercilessly rich. He needs to explain the $2.8B crude oil stolen whose details are fully known to him. He ignored several court orders. He holds the judiciary in contempt. He must not be above the law.” @firstladyship: “Tinubu is simply removing his frenemies. So until he arrests Mahmood Yakubu, Hadi Sirika, Madam Palliatives & Malami, then he’s not a serious person. The APC moved the dollar from N200 to N750, & you’re clapping? Gullible people. Go to your village Iroko tree & untie your destiny.” @AK_Babawo: “If President Tinubu is thinking of arresting Malami, that will be the end of his fraudulent victory. He will expose their rigging plan from A-Z.” @AustinNwabufo: “This BAWA the EFCC dubious Chairman that was recently arrested and detained by DSS, Bawa is noted for re-lootin money obtained under menace from an EFCC victim.” @AbubakarAAliyu7: “Buhari is not a thief but if Buhari is arrested today I will not be surprised because his top government functionaries stole a lot of money. I’m eyeing Emefele, Sadiya Umar Faruk, Malami. Buhari housed real thieves. ” @kennyokolugbo: “Agbor is on the wrong side of the news. Emefiele is from Ika and Agbor is in Ika federal constituency. I said he should not be granted 10 months study leave but INVITED for questioning. Irabor, Okowa, Malami, Tunde and all the others associated with him would be at unease now.” @Morris_Monye: “Sadiya Farouq, Sirika, and Malami should be the next in custody of DSS. “Just to understand what the hell happened in the last 8yrs “Then the last stage of the game where we face the boss himself…. Buhari.” @InibeheEffiong: “Malami should be made to account for his stewardship. The activities of the Federal Ministry of Justice under his leadership should be thoroughly and decisively investigated.”

Arrest Bawa Chairman Hadi INEC Malami release Sirika

“Stop looking for who to blame for your failure”, INEC tells Peter Obi

The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, on Wednesday during a court proceeding lambasted the Labour Party’s presidential candidate in the 2023 election, Peter Obi, for accusing the Chairman of the Commission, Prof. Mahmoud Yakubu, of evading the service of a witness summon on him. INEC, through its lawyer, Mr. Kemi Pinhero, SAN, accused Obi of always looking for who to blame for his failure in the presidential election. INEC Chairman, Mahmoud Yakubu Peter Obi, who accused the 2023 presidential election of being rigged, secured a subpoena through his legal team led by Dr. Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, to force the INEC Chairman to appear before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja. Insisting that he wants the INEC boss to not only testify before the court as a witness but to equally produce and tender in evidence, some sensitive materials that were used for the conduct of the presidential election. While lamenting the inability of his client to effect service of the summon of Prof. Yakubu, Obi’s lead counsel, Dr. Uzoukwu, SAN, said: “My lords, I thought that by now, we would have been through with the stage of tendering of documents. “I have drawn the attention of the lead counsel to the INEC, Mr. Abubakar Mahmood, SAN, that the office of the Chairman of the Commission has consistently refused to accept subpoena to produce certain documents, inspite of efforts of Bailiffs of this court. “The counsel graciously asked me to give him a copy of the subpoena but I didn’t have an extra copy to give to him, so, he asked me to give it to any member of his team. “My lords, because I still do not have an extra copy, I intend to get it and send to him once the proceeding of today is over. “I am confident that he will do the needful for us to continue our case tomorrow,” he added. Kemi Pinhero, SAN while accusing Obi of always looking for who to blame for his failure said: “My lords should take note that it has become a habit for the Petitioners, that whenever they want to seek for an adjournment, they must look for someone to blame. “I was not privy to any discussion they had with our team leader because all the discussions have been open to members of our group. “However, it cannot be true that the Chairman of INEC refused to receive the subpoena. In PDP’s case, subpoenas were served, not only on the Chairman but also on some National Commissioners. “My lords should equally note that all the avalanche of documents they have tendered so far, some of them were certified as far back as in March. Mr Peter Obi “Yet, everytime, they keep complaining that INEC refused to release documents to them. “The submission that INEC refused to give documents to them, with due respect to the learned counsel, is not true. “If they want to ask for an adjournment, they should do so and not attempt to use the INEC as weeping board. “I want to say it for the records that it is not correct that INEC Chairman refused to receive subpoena. “The Chairman of INEC has no interest whatsoever. This allegation against him is most uncharitable,” Pinhero, SAN, added. Though counsel for the Petitioners, Uzoukwu, SAN, maintained his position and urged the court to verify from its Bailiffs, if the INEC Chairman did not refuse service of the subpoena, however, Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel, urged restraint from both parties. “There is no need to quarrel over this issue. If subpoena was refused, counsel knows what to do. “We should remember that after this case, we will still see each other in court. “So, let us not allow issues like this to destroy bonds of friendship,” Chairman of the panel, Justice Tsammani cautioned the senior lawyers. Following a no objection stance by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, who appeared for President Tinubu, as well as by counsel for the APC, Mr. Afolabi Fashanu, SAN, the court adjourned further hearing on the matter till Thursday.

blame failure INEC Obi PETER stop tells

Court dismisses Peter Obi’s request to question INEC on technology deployed for 2023 polls

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) on Saturday dismissed the application filed by the Labour Party and Mr Peter Obi seeking an order to question INEC on the technology it deployed for the conduct of the general elections. Obi and LP are petitioners in the petition marked CA/PEPC/03/2023 challenging the election which brought President Bola Tinubu into power Labour Party’s presidential candidate, Mr Peter Ob Respondents are the INEC, President Bola Tinubu and Vice president Kashim Shettima and All Progressives Congress (APC). Ruling on the application, the five-member panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani held that it lacked the jurisdiction to grant the request as it was brought outside the pre-hearing session and therefore incompetent. “It is an afterthought on the grounds that the pre-hearing period to file such an application elapsed on May 22. “I have not disputed the fact that they did not call the attention of the court during the pre-hearing session.”
“It is for the applicant to take a step towards the hearing of his motion on notice. The court cannot do that for him. “The petitioners’ counsel are very conversant with the provisions of the law and did not ask for an extension of time. ” They rather seek to employ the right to fair hearing as a magic wand to escape the consequence of their failure to comply with the law and blame the court for its inaction” the court held. The court also held that the applicants failed to disclose any extreme circumstance that stopped them from filing within the statutory time. In a unanimous decision, the court stated that motions cannot be heard at the hearing session and as such can be deemed as abandoned. ”Their application is incompetent and the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain it and accordingly, the application is struck out.” It held. The petitioners, among other reasons for disputing the outcome of the elections are accusing the electoral umpire of non-compliance with the Electoral Act. Their concerns also included failure to transmit the results of the presidential election in real-time on the INEC results viewing portal as assured. In their effort to support the grounds of their petition, the petitioners had asked the court to permit them to question INEC. on the technology deployed to conduct the election including the quality of the ICT experts who oversaw the conduct of the election. In two applications, the petitioners through their lawyer, Patrick Ikweto, SAN, urged the court to order INEC to supply the names and other details of its ICT professionals that deployed electronic devices for the conduct of the election. Specifically, the petitioners maintained that given INEC’s reply to their petition, it should be compelled to answer 12 questions posed to them. President Bola Tinubu The added the date the electoral body conducted functionality tests on the system it deployed for the elections, as well as names and details of those that conducted the test. They further required INEC to answer the following questions: “Who created/deployed the four (4) Applications Patches/Updates to fix the HTTP 500 error that prevented the e-transmission of the results of the Presidential election on 25th February 2023? “What was the exact time of the occurrence of the technical glitch which prevented the e-transmission of the result of the Presidential election on 25th February 2023? “What time were the technological glitches fixed and or repaired? “What percentage of the result of the Presidential election was uploaded on the I-Rev on Feb. 25? “What percentage of the result of the Presidential election was uploaded on the I-Rev at the time of the declaration of the Result of the Presidential election on March 1?”

Court deployed dismisses INEC Obis PETER polls question request TECHNOLOGY

INEC explains why agents were denied access to election results

INEC officials explain why agents were denied access to election results at 2023 Presidential Poll

Three officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC have explained that the Commission instructed them not to give final copies of election results that were tabulated in a Form EC8A, to some political party agents. The officials also admitted that they couldn’t electronically transmit the polling unit results in real-time using the BVAS device during the 2023 presidential election held on 25 February 2023 across the country. They explained this in court on Friday during the hearing of the petition candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, filed to challenge the outcome of the 2023 election. Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar The officials testified before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja that they were hired as Ad-hoc staff for the general elections. They further told the court that as Presiding Officers, they conducted the presidential election at their various polling units and subsequently handed the results to the Ward Collation Officers, saying that they were warned not to give copies of the results to any agent of a political party that failed to sign the result sheet. Recall that President Bola Tinubu, Vice President Kashim Shettima and the All Progressives Congress, APC had opposed the decision of the petitioners to produce five ad-hoc staff members of the electoral body that participated in the conduct of the presidential election, to testify as witnesses before the court. However, despite the objections, Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel of the court, gave the former Vice President, Atiku, the nod to produce the five witnesses. The court said it would reserve its ruling on the objections and deliver the same at a later date. Whereas two of the witnesses testified on Thursday, the remaining two gave their evidence on Friday.

access agents denied Election EXPLAINS INEC results

Five INEC staff members will testify against Tinubu, APC.

In the petition that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, a former vice president and candidate for the Peoples Democratic Party, filed to challenge the outcome of the 2023 presidential election, five ad hoc members of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) have been granted permission to testify as special witnesses. Subpoenaed to appear before the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, were members of the INEC ad hoc staff who were involved in the disputed presidential election results. In the joint petition he filed with his party, Atiku, who finished second in the presidential race that took place on February 25, claimed that the election was rigged in favor of President Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC. In his 66-page petition, the former vice president claimed that the electoral commission had installed a third-party device that was used, according to him, to alter the presidential election results in favor of the APC and its candidate, Bola Tinubu. He also said that INEC had replaced Mr. Chidi Nwafor, its in-house ICT expert, with an IT consultant who helped it install the third-party mechanism before the election. Atiku claims that the aforementioned IT consultant, Mr. Suleiman Farouk, ensured that the device served as an intermediary between the Device Management System, or DMS, and the IRev Portal. He told the court that the DMS was the software that allowed Mr. Farouk, INEC’s IT Security Consultant, to control, monitor, and filter data sent from the BVAS devices to the electronic collation system and the IRev platform from a distance. “For the purpose of the election, the 1st respondent, INEC, hired Tinubu, a 2nd respondent appointee, to manage and supervise the sensitive ICT department of the 1st respondent. “The petitioners contend and shall lead evidence to show that the first respondent, contrary to the original design of the BVAS machine to upload data directly to the electronic collation system and the IReV portal, devised and installed an intervening third-party device (Device Management System) that, in its normal use, is meant to secure and administer the first respondent’s technological ecosystem for the elections but was used to intercept the results, quarantine and warehouse them, and filter them before releasing them to the IRe “The First Respondent manipulated the Election results in favor of the Second and Third Respondents by utilizing the aforementioned Device Management System.
The petitioners added, “The petitioners state and shall lead expert evidence to show the critical components of the 1st Respondent’s Information and Communications Technology, ICT, including but not limited to the BVAS, which is an Android Device manufactured by Emperor Technologies China and supplied to the 1st Respondent by Activate Nigeria Limited.” The petitioners also stated that they would present expert evidence to support their claims. “As a result, lead counsel for the petitioners, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, informed the court at the resumed proceedings in the petition yesterday that his clients had subpoenaed five INEC ad-hoc staff members who were involved in the conduct of the election to appear as witnesses and to also tender sensitive materials in evidence. He added that of the five observers, three of them were in court. However, lead counsel for the INEC, Mr. Abubakar Mahmood, SAN, raised an objection as soon as the first subpoenaed ad-hoc staff was summoned into the courtroom and mounted the witness box. Mahmood, SAN, INEC’s attorney, informed the court that he was only served with the witness statements a few minutes before the proceedings began, insisting that he would need time to review the documents in order to effectively cross-examine the witnesses.
Moreover, INEC’s attorney said there was likewise the requirement for him to return to the Commission to check and affirm the personalities of the observers in order to learn in the event that they for sure filled in as impromptu staff during the political race. Both Boss Associated Olujinmi, SAN, who showed up for President Tinubu, as well as direction for the APC, Ruler Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, fell in line with the place of the INEC. The respondents kept up with that the would require time to concentrate on articulations of the observers that was served on them by the solicitors.
Even though the five-member panel, led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, initially chose a 30-minute standoff to allow the respondents to examine the statements, it later deferred further proceedings in the matter until Thursday to allow INEC’s attorney to conduct his internal investigation.
Counsel for the petitioners presented certified copies of the presidential election results from 10 local government areas (LGAs) in Kogi State earlier in the proceeding. He also presented Mr. Ndubuisi Nwobu, Chairman of the PDP in Anambra state, as the eleventh witness in the case. During the election, Nwobu told the court that he was the PDP’s state collation officer. He also said that the election results were not uploaded to INEC’s I-Rev portal in real time in about 30 of the polling places he visited.
The witness told the court that officials from INEC made him sign the election result because they said they wouldn’t give him a copy unless he signed it. As per him, “Each work made to transfer the outcomes to the I-Fire up entrance fizzled. Witnesses said that “magic started happening at the ward level,” and that some INEC officials would have been abused by enraged voters if he hadn’t intervened quickly. The witness, Fagbemi, SAN, said he wrote a letter after the election to complain about all the anomalies he saw and the obvious non-compliance with the Electoral Act while being cross-examined by the APC lawyer.
“My objection was not about the BVAs, but rather that results were not transferred to the I-Fire up entrance as we were guaranteed broadly by the INEC director,” the observer added. Even as he requested the cancellation of the Certificate of Return that INEC gave to President Tinubu, Atiku is requesting, among other reliefs, that the court declare that he was the legitimate winner of the presidential election.

APC INEC Members staff testify TINUBU