INEC closes defence in Atiku’s petition with one witness
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) called one witness that testified in the petition filed by the candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, challenging the outcome of the 2023 presidential election. At the resumed proceeding on Monday, INEC tendered four documentary exhibits in evidence, which include a letter dated July 6, 2022, which the Vice President, Kashim Shettima, wrote to notify it of his decision to withdraw as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, for the Borno Central Senatorial election. Led in evidence by INEC’s lead counsel, Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, the witness, Mr. Lawrence Bayode, who is a Deputy Director of ICT at the Commission, tendered the letter and its accompanying certification, which was admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits RA-1 and RA-2. Under cross-examination by counsel to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Chief Olanipekun, SAN, the witness, insisted that the presidential election held on February 25, was “free, fair, credible and conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act.” The witness also told counsel to APC, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the witness said that the technical glitch that was experienced on Election Day did not affect the actual scores of all the presidential candidates, which he said remained intact. He further told the court that the results of the presidential election were not electronically collated, saying it was done manually. “INEC does not have an electronic collation system,” he insisted, adding that INEC had few days to the presidential poll, and announced that electronic transmission of results of the election would not be feasible. However, while being cross-examined by counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, the witness, told the court that the European Union, EU, Observation Mission was accredited by INEC to monitor the 2023 general elections. On if he was aware that the EU has released its final report on the election, the witness, said: “Yes I am aware, but I have not seen it.” When he was shown a certified copy of the EU’s report and asked to read from a portion of it, the Respondents raised objections. Though they opposed the admissibility of the report as part of the proof of evidence in the case, Justice Haruna Tsammani-led’s five-member panel of the court admitted it in evidence as Exhibit RA-6. The witness, read a paragraph in the report where the EU stated that 2023 was not “a transparent and inclusive election” as promised by the INEC. He also read a portion of the report that stated that “only 31% of results uploaded in I-REV was formally or mathematically correct.” However, he maintained that technological innovations that INEC introduced into the electoral process were to guarantee transparency and integrity of the results. Also, the lead counsel to Tinubu, informed the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, its readiness to open his defence to petitions seeking to nullify his client’s election, on Tuesday. Tribunal admits EU final report, faulting Tinubu’s election. The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) Monday, admitted as exhibit, the final report of the European Union Election Observer Mission, which faulted the conduct and outcome of the 2023 presidential election that produced President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and others. The report tendered by the former Vice President and Presidential candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) in the February 25 presidential election, Atiku Abubakar was admitted as exhibit in spite of vehement objections by President Bola Tinubu, All Progressive Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). In the report, the EU election observer mission claimed that the presidential election did not show credibility, fairness, and transparency in the ways and manners it was conducted by INEC. The report tendered through INEC’s sole witness and Director of Information Technology (IT), Dr. Lawrence Bayode said only 31 percent of the presidential election result was uploaded into INEC’s result viewing portal. Before the admission of the report, Atiku through his lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche SAN had applied that cross-examination of the INEC’S witness must be kick-started by Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress APC in view of their common interests against Atiku’s petition. The application was however bluntly opposed by Tinubu and APC through their lead counsel, Wole Olanipekun SAN, and Prince Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi SAN respectfully. However, the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led panel admitted it as evidence.
Tribunal: Fireworks resume July 3 as Atiku and Obi seek to dethrone Tinubu
The 2023 Presidential Elections may have come and gone, but the legal fireworks fanned by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi continue to fiercely burn. Suffice it to say that it has been a topsy-turvy three weeks at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) as the aggrieved parties battled to drive home their case challenging the declaration of Ahmed Bola Tinubu as the winner of the said election. On May 8th, the presidential election petition kicked off with five petitions from different political parties which were later consolidated. In the buildup of the full-blown hearing of the petitions, there was mild drama as two aggrieved parties Action Alliance (AA) and the Action Peoples Party (APP) withdrew their petitions, during the pre-hearing sessions of the petitions. However, Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Alliance Peoples Movement (APM) continued with the quest to upturn the outcome of the presidential election. The petitioners were given three weeks to prove their case, after the pre-election reports were delivered on 23rd May 2023, as time allocated for hearing, calling of witnesses and cross-examinations were stated for easy conduct of proceedings. On July 23rd, Mr Obi and LP closed their case after calling 13 witnesses as against the 50 witnesses registered in their pre-hearing schedule, amongst which they tendered documents, and the total number of registered voters and Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs) collected in 32 states in the lead up to the presidential polls to aid their case. All their witnesses who were party agents and INEC officials, submitted that accreditation of voters was seamless, but transmission of Presidential election results was difficult, adding that they were made to sign the forms EC8As under duress. According to the witnesses, all the Labour Party agents totalled 133,000 as against the 176,974 polling units across the country, and they insisted that Peter Obi should be declared winner because he had the most results which were not uploaded as promised by INEC. Peter Obi and the Labour Party also tendered a report through a subpoenaed witness, Claretta Ogar, who is a cloud engineer and architect and an employee of Amazon Web Services Incorporated, USA. According to the Star witness, the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election did not experience any glitch that could have affected the e-transmission of results on February 25, 2023. The report specifically provides details on the health status of the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election. The document, totaling six copies were admitted by the court amid objections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and the All Progressive Congress (APC). Also, two subpoenaed witnesses of the Labour Party and Peter Obi, contradicted each other on the powers and responsibilities of the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA, as related to the February 25, 2023 general elections. Chebuike Ngwoke, a digital cyber-security expert, commissioned to do a cyber-security and risk analysis of the election by the Labour Party, told the court that the International System for Standardization, ISO Certification, is expected to be issued by the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA and to the Independent National Electoral Commission in line with the 2007 Act that established it. However, another subpoenaed witness of Obi, Emmanuel Edet, a legal officer from NITDA contradicted the position that there was no provision in the NITDA Act that gave the agency that role when he was crossed examined by Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Counsel to Tinubu. On the part of Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), they had on the 21st of March filed their petitions challenging the emergence of President Bola Tinubu in the February 25 elections. Closing their case on Friday 23rd June, called a total of 27 witnesses as against 100 submitted in the pre-hearing schedule to prove their case, amongst other documents tendered. However, speaking to reporters, lead counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Chris Uche SAN, said that the documents tendered took the place of the remaining 73 witnesses. Some of the notable witnesses called were three Presiding Officers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) who told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that the refusal of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) to transmit the presidential election results on Election Day frustrated their jobs. The Officers, who were testifying on subpoena, admitted that the results of the Senate and the House of Representatives were transmitted unhindered and that the problems of technical glitches arose at the point of transmitting only the presidential poll results. The three witnesses are Janet Nuhu Turaki, Christopher Bulus Ardo and Victoria Sani who served as INEC’S Presiding Officers at Yobe, Bauchi and Katsina States, respectfully. Also among the testifiers was Hitler Uwala, who is a forensic Analyst and he tendered 7 volumes of reports based on the 110 BVAS machines inspected. Under the evidence in chief, Uwala told the court that the results contained in the 110 BVAS machines he inspected were deleted. However, while under cross-examination by the INEC counsel, he admitted that he was not in Abuja when the elections were conducted and that nothing was wrong with the BVAS machine when he inspected them. He added that he didn’t interview any of the election presiding officers and does not know if anything was wrong with the BVAs machine on Election Day. INEC further told the court that the 110 BVAS machines inspected in the Federal Capital Territory constitute only 3.5% out of the 3163 devices allocated to Abuja and less than 0.06% of the total number of BVAS deployed across Nigeria. To verify the witness’ claims on deleting of results, INEC’s lawyer brought four BVAS devices for the witness to inspect but he refused saying it was professionally wrong to do that as the figures might have been tampered with. Uwala added that he can’t identify the BVAs machine given to him as
INEC deleted results on 110 BVAS, Atiku’s witness tells Tribunal
A prosecution witness 26 (PW26) of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, Mr Hitler Nwala has told the Presidential Election Petition Court, (PEPC) that results on all the 110 BVAS machines he inspected were deleted. Testifying before the court, Nwala said that the machines inspected were only those from the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). Led in evidence-in-chief by the lead counsel to Atiku, Chief Chris Uche SAN, the subpoenaed witness said that he was a Digital Forensic Analyst and that he didn’t know at what point the results were deleted it from the 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. In his defense, the expert witness said 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 look the same on the outside, he couldn’t tell if it was one of the ones he inspected my merely looking at it. On his part, counsel to the All Progressives Congress, (APC) Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN told the witness that neither he nor any of his team member 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 Olanipekin, 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 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 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 hearing in the petition until Friday. Recall that going by the pre-hearing report, Atiku and the PDP are expected to close their case on Thursday, 22nd June (today), however a grace of one day was given. With the new development, the Prosecution will be closing their case on Friday, the 23rd, June.
We were told not to give results to agents who refused to sign – INEC Staff
A staff of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Abedemi Joseph on Friday told the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, that they were instructed by their employer not to give copies of election results to political parties’ agents who declined to sign the results. The Subpoenaed witness of PDP presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar revealed this in court. Led in evidence-in-chief by the petitioners’ lead counsel, Chris Uche, SAN, Joseph prayed the court to adopt her witness statement on oath as her evidence in the petition against the victory of Tinubu. Joseph, who was a presiding officer in Niger State during the February 25 presidential elections, told the court that she was satisfied with the process as instructed. She however said that they had instructions not to give out results of the election to party agents who did not sign the result sheet. Also testifying, a presiding agent in Edo State during the election, told the court that she tried in vain to upload the presidential election results to the INEC server. While another Subpoenaed witness from Kogi State, Grace Ajagbonna also affirmed the peaceful conduct of the election, she said she was not happy that she could not upload the presidential election results as instructed. Ajagbonna, responding to INEC counsel as to whether she was happy with the conduct of the election and her work as presiding officer, said, “I was not happy that I was unable to transmit the results to the server.” However, INEC, represented by Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN; APC, represented by Lateef Fagbemi, SAN and other respondents objected to the use of statements made on oath by the subpoenaed witnesses to be tendered at the Tribunal in aid of Atiku’s petition. Counsel to Atiku, Chris Uche SAN, urged the court to discountance their objections and grant their request. The five-man panel headed by Justice, Haruna Tsammani reserved ruling on the applications. Meanwhile, the Court has adjourned further hearing to June 10.
Tribunal: Obi, LP seek leave to hear motion on interrogation against INEC
Mr Peter Obi and the Labour Party (LP) have prayed the court to hear motion originally filed on the 22nd May, 2023, seeking it’s leave to serve and deliver interrogatory letter on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The Petitioners informed the court that on June 2nd, they filed another motion seeking the leave of the court to hear the motion of 22nd May outside the pre-hearing section. In the letter, the Petitioners poses 12 questions on while INEC has not responded on the issues of calling of subpoenas to testify in the petition against the outcome of the 2013 Presidential election. Responding, INEC, through it’s counsel, Abubakar Mahmoud SAN, Wole Olanipekun SAN, counsel to Tinubu and Lateef Fagbemi SAN counsel to APC opposed the motion of June 2, stating that it was served on then on the same date. They maintained that the motion is not yet ripe for hearing as they need to time to respond. On the motion of 22nd of June, Mahmoud submitted the electoral empire has filed their responds on the 25 June. “We are opposing the June 2 application and our objection will take care of that of 22nd May. “We will file our reply within the time allotted to rules. ” We are ready to go on with the substantive matter. We have passed the stage of interrogatory. This move is a waste of time,” they submitted. In the bench ruling, chairman of the panel, Justice Haruna Tsamani fixed 6th June for hearing on the motion.
Tribunal: Atiku didn’t win 25% vote in FCT- PDP Witness
The first Petition Witness (PW9) of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and their candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, has told the Election Petition Court that Atiku didn’t secure 25% of votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in the 2023 Presidential Election. The witness, Abraham David of Karmajiji community in the FCT, while under cross-examination, confirmed that the PDP candidate who didn’t score 25% votes, didn’t qualify to be declared the president of Nigeria. However, the businessman posited that for the fact that Ahmed Bola Tinubu who also didn’t score up to 25% votes could be returned as the president, Atiku Abubakar can also be returned as the winner. Led by the Counsel to Tinubu, Akin Olujimi SAN, the witness, who said he visited 15 polling units out of the 2,822 polling units in FCT, maintained that unlawful votes were collated by the All Progressive Congress (APC) agents, but didn’t state the figures in his statement on oath. The witness, who claimed to be FCT Collation Officer for PDP, alleged that ballot papers and result sheets were manipulated by compromised Electoral officers in collusion with agents of other political parties. Also testifying, was a petition witness number 10(PW10), Ibrahim Mohammed Hamza of Lafia Nasarawa State. Led in evidence by Atiku’s lead counsel, Akin Olujimi SAN, the witness, who said he is a Human Resources Consultant, identified Form EC8A 25, which is a collated result sheet from Nasarawa State. However, the witness maintained he signed clean documents while the documents he can identify with his signature were altered with cancellations. “My lords, the documents I signed had no cancellations. They must have altered the results. The cancellation was made after I endorsed my signature.” The Nasarawa State collation officer also maintained that the election results were not uploaded in most of the 3,256 polling units across the state, adding that he signed the result sheets under duress. “At the time of uploading the results, the system failed in most of the polling units across the state. “I signed the results sheet under duress because I needed a copy to submit at the state level,” he testified So far, Atiku and his party have called 10 witnesses out of 100 witnesses lined up to prove their petition seeking to sack Bola Tinubu from Office. The proceeding continues tomorrow, the 6th of June.
Tribunal: Why we refused admittance of our own documents in evidence -INEC
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on Friday in Abuja, seized an opportunity presented at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) to explain its reasons for refusing that its own documents be admitted in evidence. The presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP,) Mr. Peter Obi, and his party sought to tender the documents as exhibits to establish their petition against the conduct of the Feb. 25 Presidential Election. INEC had on Thursday, through its counsel, Mr. Kemi Pinhero, SAN, objected to the admission of several documents brought to the PEPC by the petitioners for the purpose of tendering them as exhibits in support of their petition. At Friday’s proceedings, INEC also objected to all the certified true copies of the Form EC8A the petitioners sought to tender from local governments across six states. INEC’s counsel, Pinheiro told the court that the electoral body kicked against the tendering of certified true copies of the documents, mainly election result sheets, on the grounds that they were strange to the petition. Pinheiro explained that issues were not joined in the local government areas where the result sheets were sought to be tendered, adding that it was wrong for the petitioners to go beyond the areas where the election was disputed. According to INEC, the local government areas unlawfully smuggled into proceedings of the court are totally strange to the petition and cannot stand in the face of the law. The Chairman of the Court, Justice Haruna Tsammani, however, held that it was wrong for INEC’S lawyer to attempt to give reasons for his objection now when all parties had agreed during the pre-hearing stage to give reasons at the address stage. The counsel, however, said that he was compelled to offer some explanation following the bashing the commission received in the media that it was objecting to the admittance of its own documents in court. Meanwhile, the court has admitted as exhibits, Forms EC8A from 21 local government areas of Adamawa, Lagos state, eight local government areas of Bayelsa, and parts of Rivers and Niger as tendered by the petitioners.
Court bars NYSC from further disclaiming Enugu governor-elect’s certificate
The Federal High Court, Abuja has restrained the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) from further publishing a disclaimer, denying the issuance of a certificate dated Janaury 6, 2003 to the Enugu state Governor-elect, Mr. Peter Mbah. Ruling on an ex-parte application moved by Mr. Emeka Ozoani (SAN), on behalf of Mbah, Justice Inyang Ekwo also barred the NYSC Director, Corps Certification, Mr Ibrahim Muhammad from continuing to issue a disclaimer to the effect that Mbah’s NYSC certificate was not issued by the NYSC. Ozoani brought the motion under Section 13(1) & (2) of the Federal High Court Act Cap F12, Vol. 6, Law of Federation of Nigeria, 2004, and Order 26 Rule 6(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019. Justice Ekwo granted prayer one on the motion paper. The judge, however, refused to grant prayer two saying that it was far-reaching but rather ordered the plaintiff to put the defendants on notice. He said that the second prayer was an issue to be adjudicated upon in the substantive suit. Consequently, the trial judge ordered the applicant to serve the defendants with court processes within two days of the order. The motion ex parte was predicated on 10 grounds. He said that after graduating in law from the University of East London in 2000, returned to Nigeria and as a pre-requisite to practice as a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, applied and was admitted into the Bar part 1 programme of the Nigerian Law School. Mbah said upon completing the bar part I exam, he had to wait for the bar part 2 programme, and was advised that instead of spending time idling around, he should proceed to the mandatory one year NYSC programme. He said he was called up for NYSC and was deployed initially to Nigerian Ports Authority Apapa for his primary assignment but was rejected by NPA, before securing the law firm of Ude & Associates. “The plaintiff in the course of his service year and after six months of NYSC, applied and was granted approval to defer the NYSC in order to enable him complete the bar final exam. “Thereafter, the plaintiff was re-mobilized to finish the NYSC programme, which he did complete.” Mbah averred that upon completion of the NYSC, he was issued the certificate of National Service No. A.808297 dated January 6 2003. Justice Ekwo adjourned the matter until May 22 for a hearing of the motion on notice. The NYSC had on Feb. 1 written a letter signed by Mr. Ibrahim Mohammed, saying that the NYSC certificate belonging to Mbah was not issued by the corps. Mbah of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) won the Enugu state governorship election held on March 18.