The Nation Newspaper

Tag: ELECTION

  • Delta poll: Tribunal admits election results as evidence

    Delta State Governor Ifeanyi Okowa, on Friday, failed to stop the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate, Olorogun O’tega Emerhor, from presenting the governorship election result sheets used in the April 11 election from the 25 local government areas.

    The APC candidate approached the tribunal, challenging the election of Okowa of the People Democratic Party (PDP).

    At the resumed hearing on Friday, APC’s lawyer, Thompson Okpoko (SAN), while examining his witness, Ore Ohimor, said he would tender forms EC8A, EC8D and EC8E, that is, the state, local government and unit-by-unit election result sheets for the 25 local government areas.

    But Ken Mozie (SAN), lawyer to Okowa, opposed the moved.

    The lawyer argued that the documents sought to be tendered were not neither pleaded nor listed in the witnesses’ statement on oath.

    He averred that the documents listed in the witnesses’ statement on oath are: forms EC8D and EC8E, not form EC8A.

    Mozie said any attempt to tender form EC8A would amount to subverting due process and obtaining justice through the backdoor.

    He said: “We object to the admissibility of these documents. The fundamental foundational requirements were not met. In paragraph 14 of the witnesses’ statement, only forms EC8D and EC8E were pleaded. In their reply to our reply, it was not pleaded; no reference was made to the document sought to be tendered. Therefore, listing the document will not cure it, if it was not accommodated in their pleading.”

    Counsel to PDP, Timothy Kehinde (SAN), noted that it was an elementary principle of law to put the parties on notice and not by surprise.

    The lawyer said the document sought to be tendered should be specifically pleaded.

    He said an “unpleaded” document cannot be admitted even when the document was mentioned in the witnesses’ statement.

    According to him, the document was not mentioned in the witnesses’ statement on oath; neither was it pleaded.

    INEC’s lawyer, O. Anumonye, averred that “the document sought to be tendered by APC and Emerhor were not referred to in the witnesses’ deposition”.

    He added: “Having pleaded over voting by tendering forms EC8D and form EC8E, pleading form EC8A will constitute springing a surprise.”

    But Okpoko said Form EC8A was listed among the documents to be tendered, adding that the documents were identified on paragraphs seven and eight of the petition.

  • Appeal Court: Faulty card reader can’t invalidate an election

    A faulty card reader cannot be a ground for invalidating an election, the court of Appeal in Lagos said yesterday.

    The court held that the Electoral Act (2010) as amended does not recognise the malfunctioning of a card reader as one of the factors that can lead to the nullification of an election.

    This, the appellate court held, is because the Electoral Act predates the introduction of the card reader.

    The Court of Appeal stated this in a verdict on a cross-appeal filed by the All Progressives Congress (APC) challenging parts of the Governorship Election Tribunal’s verdict in the case of Jimi Agbaje versus Governor Akinwunmi Ambode and others.

    APC  filed the cross-appeal  on two grounds. In the first ground, it said the tribunal erred in law when, having held that Paragraph 14 of Agbaje’s petition challenged Ambode’s nomination, went ahead to hold that it was a valid ground.

    The party said any complaint about a pre-election issue falls within the jurisdiction of the Federal or Lagos State High Court, therefore, the tribunal ought to have declined jurisdiction.

    The party also asked that Agbaje’s petition be struck out because its paragraph 13b which complained about faulty card readers did not qualify as a ground to challenge the April 11 election.

    The Court of Appeal, in a judgment by Justice Obande Festus Ogbuinya, resolved the first issue in Agbaje and PDP’s favour, and the second issue in APC’s favour.

    A copy of the judgment, delivered on August 26, was obtained by our correspondent yesterday. Other justices on the panel were A. J. Abdulkadir, Mohammed Danjuma, Emmenuel Agim and Saidu Hussaini.

    Agbaje, the PDP, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Ambode and the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) were the cross-respondents.

    The appellate court held that both the High Courts and the tribunal have concurrent jurisdiction over the issue of a candidate’s qualification/disqualification.

    Justice Ogbuinyi held: “The cross-appellant (APC) implored this court to declare the paragraph 14 a pre-election matter cognisable only in the regular courts because it alluded to 21 days notice decreed in Section 85 (1) of the Electoral Act. The cross-appellant made heavy weather of this point.

    “The paragraph 14 of the petition qualifies as a valid ground for querying the qualification of the fourth cross-respondent (Ambode) to contest the election.

    “The trial tribunal is the forum competens for the first and second cross-respondents (Agbaje and PDP) to ventilate their grouse on his (Ambode’s) qualification/disqualification. Put simply, the trial tribunal was clothed with jurisdiction over paragraph 14 of the petition.

    “In the end, I have no option than to resolve issue one against the cross-appellant and in favour of the first and second cross-respondents.”

    Resolving the second issue in APC’s favour, the appellate court held: “The paragraph (13b) displays a vitriolic attack on the irregularities germinating from the improper or non-use of the smart card readers in the polling units.

    “As it is, it has no life of its own as a ground. It endeavours to introduce the defects in the use of smart card readers. The evolution of the concept of smart card reader is a familiar one. It came to being during the last general election. On this score, it is a nascent procedure injected into our infant and fledgling electoral system to ensure credible and transparent election.

    “The extant Electoral Act (2010) which predates the concept (of card reader) is not its parent or progenitor. Since it is not the progeny of the Electoral Act, fronting it as a ground to challenge any election does not have its (the Electoral Act’s) blessing, nay Section 138 (1) of it.

    “Put simply, a petitioner cannot project the non-presence or improper use of smart card reader as a ground for questioning an election. It does not qualify as one.

    “On the whole, having resolved the two issues for and against the cross-appellant, the fate of the cross-appeal is obvious. It is partially-meritorious and succeeds in part. Consequently, I allow the cross-appeal in part.

    “Accordingly, I affirm the portion of the trial tribunal’s decision declaring paragraph 14 of the petition as competent and triable by it. I set aside its part of the decision which approved paragraph 13 (b) as a competent ground for presenting a petition.”

    The Court of Appeal had upheld the Governorship Election Tribunal’s decision which struck out Agbaje’s petition and upheld Ambode’s victory.

     

  • Election tribunal upholds Ugwuanyi’s election

    The Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Enugu, yesterday upheld the election of Governor Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi of Enugu State in the April 11, 2015 governorship election.

    It struck out the petition filed by the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the state, Okey Ezea, on the grounds that it was frivolous, lacked merit and against court processes.

    This was followed by a cost of N150,000 to each of the 6 respondents in the petition.

    Delivering the judgment, which lasted for over three hours, the Chairman of the three-man tribunal, Justice Kwajafa Hildad, among other findings, held that the tribunal had earlier in the course of the hearing struck out several paragraphs of Ezea’s petition for being imprecise, vague, related to party nomination, which is a pre-election matter and contained criminal allegation against people who were not made parties to the petition.

    He added that the petitioners’ allegation on over-voting and non-accreditation through the manipulation of the Card Readers Machine by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and other respondents were not sufficiently proved, as it is only the voters’ register that could determine the number of voters that participated in an election, stating that the petitioner failed to provide the voters’ registers to prove his case.

    The tribunal also noted that the petitioners’ witnesses, six 6 persons drawn from 6 polling units out of the 2,958 polling units in the state, was not sufficient to provide enough evidence to support his case, rendering it incompetent.

    It further held that even at that, the six witnesses admitted that the governorship election was free, fair and peaceful, with minor irregularities which were not sufficient enough to cancel the election.

    It deposed that the petitioners also failed to prove their allegation of falsification result figures, maintaining that mere assertion that the figures were falsified was not enough evidence to allow them their prayers.

    The tribunal went on to dismiss the petition and upheld the election of Governor Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi as valid.

    Reacting on the judgment, the Vice Chairman of Association of Local Government Chairmen of Nigeria (ALGON) Enugu State chapter , Nnanna Nze,  described it as a reflection of the wishes of the majority of the people of Enugu State.

    Nze said that the judgment has proved that Enugu is a PDP State and the governor was freely elected by the people.

    The news was greeted with loud cheers by supporters of Governor Ugwuanyi, who went into wild jubilation, singing victory songs in praise of the governor, who drove round major streets of Enugu, accompanied by local government chairmen.

    Meanwhile, the Deputy President of the Senate, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, has congratulated Governor Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi on the victory, describing it as victory for the people of the state.

    Reacting to the verdict, he said it was  a reaffirmation of the overwhelming popularity of the governor and the strength of the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) in Enugu State in particular and the South East in general.

    Ekweremadu further observed that the decision of the tribunal did not come as a surprise to the people of Enugu State and realistic political pundits around the country because Enugu State remained an indisputable stronghold of the PDP.

    He added: “Some petitions are sheer fulfilment of all political righteousness. The volume of Ugwanyi’s goodwill and popularity among the political class and the masses as a governorship aspirant, candidate, and now an incumbent governor is unprecedented.

    So, we made the right choice and what the tribunal has just done is to confirm that our choice was fairly, freely, and credibly made in compliance with the electoral laws.”

  • UNICAL: students hold election amid protest

    UNICAL: students hold election amid protest

    Students of the University of Calabar (UNICAL) have elected their union leaders at a poll that almost ended in controversy. FRANK EJEAGBASI (400-Level Physiology) and JOSEPH OCHANG (Library and Information Science) report.

    As soon as the ban on political campaign was lifted, the University of Calabar (UNICAL) began to bubble with electioneering. This was followed by the composition of the Calabar University Electoral Commission (CUECO), a body charged to midwife the election of the Students’ Union Government (SUG).

    Immediately members of the commission was sworn in, its chairman, Dr Anozeng Igiri announced the day for manifestoes, where candidates presented their programmes.

    The event witnessed a large turnout of students at the International Conference Centre, who came to listen to the agenda of the contestants.

    The process was not without controversies. Supporters of some candidates were opposed to CUESO’s decision to conduct the election via electronic voting. They saw it as a ploy by the management to enthrone its stooges. This led to a protest, with some saying the e-voting could lead to the emergence of unpopular candidates.

    According to the electoral commission, the e-voting method would enable students, who had paid their school fees, to log on to the school website and cast their votes from their hostels. But, the protesters rejected the method, calling for paper-ballot method.

    Following the impasse, the management met with the aggrieved students, during which they listed their misgivings about the e-voting method. The Dean of Students’ Affairs (DSA), Prof Eyong Eyong, told them the management had no plans to foist leaders on students, adding that the e-voting portal was designed by experts to prevent irregularities in the process.

    Prof Eyong said: “The management has no special interest in any candidate; it is students’ union and we will let students decide who leads them.”

    On the election day, voting was scheduled to hold between 10am and 2pm, during which the e-voting portal would be open. Supporters of candidates were seen moving round the hostels and classrooms with laptops to access the e-voting portal.

    A resident of Hall 5, who identified himself as Bassey, said: “I seriously don’t understand the magic the electoral committee is doing. They told us the portal would be open from 10am for voting and it has been over an hour now, nobody has been able to access the portal.”

    At the College of Medical Sciences, students were agitating, because of their inability to log on to the portal. A Medical Laboratory Science student, Emeka Augustine, said: “We have been going about with three different laptops, which are all connected to the Internet. We have mobilised students to vote but none of them has able to successfully vote. We are yet to vote access the portal at noon, two hours after the election started.”

    Students, who could not bear the frustration, embarked on a peaceful demonstration round the campus, marching on the management building. The outgoing SUG president, Emmanuel Ajang, and Director of Welfare, John Alawa, appealed to the protesters to be calm, observing that the portal was being fixed.

    Dissatisfied with the explanation, the angry students demanded to have audience with the school management on possible cancellation of the exercise.

    One of the protesters, who pleaded for anonymity, said: “We saw this coming; we told them (management) we did not trust the e-voting method, yet they went ahead with it. We cannot sit back and watch them do things wrongly. This is students’ election.”

    When CAMUSLIFE demanded to speak to Dr Igiri on the hitches, the electoral committee chairman declined comment.

    The DSA, Prof Eyong, apologised for the hitch, saying the control centre of the e-voting portal was facing some challenges. He assured the protesters the problem would be fixed as officials of the school Information Technology centre were making efforts to fix the problem.

    The protesters were not convinced by the Dean’s explanation. The demanded cancellation of the process as the shout of “no e-voting” rented the air. The DSA urged for calm, saying: “If by 2pm we cannot solve the challenges, we shall cancel the election and reschedule for a later date.”

    However, at 1:30pm, the e-voting portal came up and students started to cast their votes. The process was extended to 4:15 pm.

    At the end of the exercise, Tete Ekpo Okon was declared president-elect with 1,373 votes, while Sandra Chukwurah emerged Vice President with 1,196 votes. Victor Bisong was elected as General Secretary with 1,047 votes and Ifiok Assamudo emerged Assistant General Secretary.

    Others are Blessing Igri, Financial Secretary, John Madu, Director of Welfare, Kingsley Nwokolo, Director of Sports, Richard Unwana, Director of Socials and Fabian Nwohia, Director of Information.

    Some observers described the exercise as free and fair, but they bemoaned the delay.

    During their swearing in, the Vice-Chancellor (VC), Prof James Epoke, advised the union leaders to set good standards, saying unionism was not for violent confrontation but to partner with the management to improve welfare of students.

    The president, Tete, said: “We will try our best to live up to expectation with the aim to sustain the existing peace on campus for effective learning.”

  • ‘How Akwa Ibom election was marred’

    ‘How Akwa Ibom election was marred’

    The Akwa Ibom State Election Petition Tribunal has been receiving testimonies from the petitioners’ witnesses. JOSEPH JIBUEZE recounts some of the revelations. 

    Amid allegations of threats to security, the Akwa Ibom Governorship Elections Petitions Tribunal was relocated from Uyo, the state’s capital, to Abuja. It followed the approval of All Progressives Congress (APC’s) request by the Court of Appeal President Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa.

    Following the April 11 election, the APC had rejected the result declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which proclaimed the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Udom Emmanuel winner.

    In its petition, the APC and its candidate Umana Okon Umana, alleged, among others, that the election was marred by widespread electoral malpractices, disenfranchisement of voters and a declaration of votes for the PDP in virtual violation of INEC provisions that required that all votes cast be duly accredited. To him, there was no election.

    A member of the party’s legal team, Victor Iyanam, had accused the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC), Austin Okojie, of consistently refusing to cooperate with the APC to conduct forensic examination of materials. The electoral commissioner, however, denied the accusation, saying the only disagreement was whether to allow the party go straight to scan the documents, or sort out and count the documents before scanning.

    APC’s lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun(SAN), sought the relocation of the petition from Uyo because of threats of insecurity and also to guarantee the expeditious dispensation of justice.

    Effort to stop the tribunal from sitting in Abuja failed. The tribunal dismissed Emmanuel’s motion challenging its jurisdiction, describing it as misconceived and misplaced.

    The Tribunal Chairman, Justice Sadiq Umar agreed with Olanipekun that the issue of security is recognised in law in deciding where an election tribunal should sit. The tribunal held that the objection raised against the relocation for security reasons was misconceived.

    Among those who have testified is a business man Michael George from Ibesikpo Asuquo LGA. He said he acted as APC’s agent during the election. His collation unit, he said, was at Nung Ukana.

    He said he got to the collation centre on election day at about 1:30 pm and left around 5:00 pm. He said he did not meet any other party agent at the centre.

    George said there was no election in his LGA, therefore, no result could have emanated from there. According to him, his polling agents reported to him through phone calls that there was no election. He said there was no election anywhere in his ward.

    Another witness, Steve Ekpenyong, a cleric based in Obot Akara, said he is from the same area as the former Deputy Governor, Chris Ekpenyong. The witness said he was at the ward collation centre from 7:30 am and left at about 8:30 am.

    According to him, his polling unit was opposite his ward collation centre, and he was at the collation centre till 12:00 am the next day. He said his party had two LGA collation agents and that he made calls to them informing them that all the election materials had been hijacked by hoodlums.

    Ekpeyong said he did not report to the police because officers were allegedly present when he was beaten up by the thugs while electoral officers were nowhere to be found.

    Under cross examination, he said he saw a man at the collation centre who was in custody of the materials before they were hijacked, adding that the materials never reached the polling units.

    A former Petroleum Resources Minister Atuekong Don Etiebet told the tribunal that elections did not hold according to law in Oruk Anam LGA where he comes from.

    He testified to massive irregularities, including but not limited to ballot snatching, absence of ballot materials at polling units, and violence.

    He tendered four exhibits, namely: his voter’s card; his press statement condemning the sham elections, newspaper publication of the press statement and a video recording of his visit along with other leaders of the state to INEC head office in Uyo on the night of the election to see whether there was state collation of the ballot.

    He said during the visit they found the INEC’s office in total darkness with no work going on. Okojie, he said, was nowhere to be found on election night when the office ought to be a beehive of activity. He said he was surprised that the following morning, a result was announced and Emmanuel was declared winner.

    A former governor, Obong Victor Attah, also testified. He tendered his PVC to prove that he was a registered voter. However, he said he could not vote because elections did not hold in his town.

    He also tendered video recordings and testified orally to the effect that elections did not hold according to law in Ibesikpo Asutan LGA where he hails from.

    A female National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) member, who served in Mbiabong, Uyo, recounted how thugs allegedly invaded her unit and carted away election materials.

    She said the hoodlums arrived in vehicles with arms, shouting and hailing the PDP and grabbed the ballot materials under her watch. When she resisted them, she said, they beat her up, tore up her clothing and threatened to incapacitate her.

    She said a kind onlooker brought his jacket to cover her near nakedness. She added that she and her colleagues at the unit had to run for dear lives. She tendered the clothing as evidence.

    The Tribunal began on July 13. At the start, lawyers to Emmmanuel, Paul Usoro and Tayo Oyetibo, both Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN), argued that the tribunal should disallow all key witnesses brought by the APC on the basis of alleged concealment of their names.

    The SANs had separately raised objections on the statements on oath made by all the APC witnesses on the ground that their real names were not on the statements but initials and acronyms.

    Oyetibo argued that the mere use of initials or acronyms should not be allowed by the tribunal to confer originality on the witnesses since their real names were not printed on the statements they had sworn to.

    But Olanipekun insisted they had the right under the law to use initials or acronyms on their statements on oath. He cited different authorities to back up his claims, as he adduced the issue of security as reason names of witnesses are often concealed.

    Justice Umar held that the objection was strange and could not be supported by law. He agreed with Olanipekun’s submission by that witnesses have the right under the law to use their initials or acronym on their statements on oath.

    INEC was directed to move all of the materials used in the elections that are in their custody to Abuja and make them available to the APC team for forensic inspection. But before an extension was granted for the inspection, respondents opposed the application on the grounds that APC and its candidate did not rightly state the facts. The petitioner had, however, complained that the forensic team was not allowed to carry out its work.

    It was alleged that the PDP who is a respondent and who’s role in the forensic exercise is to primarily observe the process were strangely given priority to determine how the process is carried out.

    Some of the excuses that hampered the inspection since May 15 include INEC’s claim that it needed to sort and differentiate ballot papers; and that it wanted to count every  ballot paper before investigation can begin.

    On July 6, when the forensic team, arrived the INEC Institute, they were allegedly denied access to the premises and made to stand outside the gate for hours because there was no letter or prior notice informing them of the visit.

    Akwa Ibom APC Publicity Secretary Ita Awak alleged a bid to “frustrate” his party in carrying out orders made on May 12 and 23 and June 25 asking that INEC grant access to the APC lawyers and its team of forensic experts to inspect the materials.

    Iyanam and APC legal team thereafter petitioned the DSS Director-General and the Inspector-General of Police.  They alleged that a mix up the ballot papers and other sensitive election materials of the Presidential, Senatorial and House of Representatives elections with the ballot papers and other election materials used for the governorship election.

    They also alleged that water was deliberately poured on bags containing sensitive election materials, soaking them in the process.

    Besides, they alleged that other bags containing more critical election materials were kept under the rain, contrary to INEC directives and established practice of keeping sensitive and important election materials and documents in INEC-approved and supplied sealable envelops and containers.

    They also allege that hundreds of thousands of ballot papers and other election materials supposedly used for the governorship election were physically mutilated beyond redemption, making it absolutely impossible for the APC forensic experts to scan them for forensic examination.

    Akwa Ibom PDP chairman Paul Ekpo’s had accused APC leaders of planning “to use every means at their disposal to subvert the will of our people,” including deploying DSS personnel to harass them, which Awak denied.

    The APC state spokesman said the DSS officials accused of “partisanship” were only “helping to contain and bring to justice people with criminal tendencies…”

    All eyes are on the tribunal to see how it all ends. Section 134 (2) of the Electoral Act 2010 states “that an election tribunal shall deliver its judgment in writing within 180 days from the date of filing of the petition.”

     

     

  • Abia North senatorial election: Kalu testifies at tribunal

    Abia North senatorial election: Kalu testifies at tribunal

    Former Abia State Governor and the senatorial candidate for Abia North

    Senatorial district in the last general elections, Dr Orji Uzor Kalu, has testified in the consolidated petition at the National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Umuahia.

    Kalu, the candidate of the Progressive People’s Alliance [PPA], is contesting the declaration of Mao Ohuabunwa as the winner of the election.

    The former governor testified as the 1st Petitioner, PW5, for about three hours, insisting that he should be declared the winner of the election, based on the result of the two local governments of Bende and Isuikwuato.

    Kalu, under cross examination by the counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mike Onyeka, said that the election in the district was inconclusive in areas like Arochukwu, Ohafia and Umunneochi council areas.

    Speaking in an interview after the session, counsel to Kalu, Kelvin Nwufo, SAN, described Kalu’s testimony as excellent, adding that he could be declared winner based on the result of the two local government areas.

    According to Nwufo, it happened in 2007 when Nkiruka Onyejiocha was declared winner based on the result of one local government, Isuikwuato, adding that it was later confirmed by the Appeal Court.

    He said Kalu’s testimony was hinged on three depositions, including the deposition in support of the petition, deposition in support of reply to the reply of the 1st respondent and “our reply in respect of the reply to the 2nd -9th respondent.

    Kalu’s counsel said a forensic expert would testify in the case on August 20, 2015, because the respondents’ objection to his testimony was granted by the tribunal, which ruled that they be served the witness’ report to enable them prepare their reply.

    The matter was adjourned to August 14, 2015 as scheduled by the tribunal.

  • Akwa Ibom election petition tribunals: Separating facts from fiction, half truths and lies

    Akwa Ibom election petition tribunals: Separating facts from fiction, half truths and lies

    For every good reason there is to lie, there is a better reason to tell the truth.” – Bo Bennett

    In its characteristic way, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Akwa Ibom State is seeking to manipulate the system to get reprieve from crimes it committed during last elections by adopting the roles of a victim. According to a news report, circulated by the party’s propaganda machine, it claimed its members are being harassed by the Department of State  Security (DSS), alleging that this agency of government is aiding and abetting the opposition at the venue of the electoral tribunals currently sitting in Abuja.

    Reading this report, one wonders if the State Chairman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in Akwa Ibom State, Obong Paul Ekpo, can recall vividly three months ago how  his party obviouly used the same agency and other security forces to harass, intimidate and kill innocent voters, who dared to resist snatching of ballot boxes by PDP political thugs. Why is PDP raising alarm over alleged harassment of members now the muzzle is facing it?

    As was expected, reportage of ongoing Akwa Ibom State Election Petition Tribunals have become highly controversial, reflecting conflicting interests in the state. On one side are reports from media correspondents on ground in Abuja, where these tribunals are ongoing and on the flipside are political appointees based in Uyo, who rely on second hand information, which are further sieved and skewed before release to the public through state sponsored media outlets and online platforms.

    Funny enough, these government apologists readily circumvent thorny questions raised as cases progress to exaggerate momentary and inconsequential issues, devising well known publicity stunts to sustain lies even though it would have been a lot easier to accept facts staring everyone in the face.

    Whatever is their reason for this deception, it is more important to note that ongoing election tribunals are different from previous ones as they have so far shown independence of the Judiciary, giving hope that the rule of law shall prevail above gimmicks and undue influence. The onus is therefore on both petitioners and respondents to argue their case on points of law regardless of whatever is peddled outside court rooms. This is the first and most critical fact.

    Secondly, supporters of the interim government are at liberty to present various shades of truth about what transpires in court daily, but they cannot undo major gains already made towards recovering what was stolen from the people. Their indiscretion cannot alter a dot in the coming judgment as it will be based on proven facts as stated in law “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”.

    Another stanch fact is that the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and most of their candidates, including Udom Emmanuel, Godswill Akpabio and others, are before state election petition tribunals in Abuja, to defend allegations of stealing the mandate of Akwa Ibom people during the last elections. Hard pressed Akwa Ibom people have risen as one in a historic move to recover their mandate from a regime that has held them captive for nearly a decade and they will stop at nothing to ensure all respondents answer for their roles in manipulating a simple and straight forward electoral process into some twisted, complicated farce.

    To achieve this feat, the people are determined to take the whole stretch as could be seen in dispassionate testimonies of principal witnesses currently recounting their personal experiences of massive electoral irregularities, fraud and violence allegedly perpetuated by PDP and its agents in active connivance with some corrupt INEC officials. There are recorded evidences proving that April 11 elections in Akwa Ibom State were far cry from credible, free and fair elections stipulated in the 1999 Nigerian Constitution (as amended) and 2010 Electoral Act (as amended).

    Incidentally, these evidences and testimonies are received regularly in court notwithstanding what lies are peddled about them afterwards. The fact is, having listened to and adopted these evidences and testimonies, the tribunals may rely on them to deliver judgment.

    Above all, from available records published by Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, one can decipher the whole story on how electoral fraud were committed by the INEC in Akwa Ibom State. All it takes is a closer look of voter accreditation computed by INEC staff at polling units across the state compared to what INEC Permanent Voter Card, PVC, readers automatically computed and sent to INEC servers in the Headquarters unknown to Okojie and his cohorts.

    Before going through the records, recall that on the 2nd of April, 2015, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, issued a very clear directive to all its officers that ONLY the “Card Reader” electronic machines be used for the accreditation of voters for the governorship and State House of Assembly elections scheduled for April 11, 2015.

    This directive was reportedly confirmed a couple of days later, by Prof Attahiru Jega, the then Chairman of INEC, during a world press conference where he maintained that the April 2 INEC directive, emphasizing that in places where there are card reader malfunction up to 5 pm, elections in these places should be shifted to Sunday, April 12, 2015. Incidentally, there was nowhere in the over 2,500 polling units across Akwa Ibom state that field officers of INEC reported the malfunction of their card readers meaning there was nowhere in the state where elections were shifted to Sunday, April 12 as such  governorship and state house of assembly elections held on April 11 without problem but how come the numbers computed into the INEC server, which were automatically generated when  Permanent Voters Card (PVC) were verified at the Polling Units across Akwa Ibom state are different from those hand filled in FORM EC 8D by INEC staff at these  polling units? The fact is, those results written in forms EC8D were doctored by INEC staff unaware that back-up PVC verifications were being simultaneously documented in the INEC servers in Abuja!

    Shouldn’t it bother all concerned how the accreditation of voters in Akwa Ibom produced two (sets) of numbers per local government by the same electoral body, one handwritten on FORM EC 8D and the other automatically accredited by INEC Server via PVC; #Akwa Ibom? Answering this question will confirm that indeed an electoral fraud was committed.

    Can INEC explain the following inconsistencies in voter accreditation?

    Abak LGA | Form EC 8D = 45, 358 Accredited | INEC Server = 25,546 Accredited, Eastern Obolo LGA | Form EC 8D = 14,592 Accredited | INEC Server = 6,521 Accredited, Eket LGA | Form EC 8D = 53,576 Accredited | INEC Server = 26,472 Accredited, Esit Eket LGA | Form EC 8D = 28,279 Accredited | INEC Server = 18,812 Accredited, Essien Udim LGA | Form EC 8D = 89,313 Accredited | INEC Server = 8,729 Accredited, Etim Ekpo LGA | Form EC 8D = 45,922 Accredited | INEC Server = 15,481 Accredited, Etinan LGA | Form EC 8D = 44,228 Accredited | INEC Server = 3,383 Accredited.  Also, Ibeno LGA | Form EC 8D = 19,032 Accredited | INEC Server = 11,980 Accredited, Ibesikpo Asutan LGA | Form EC 8D = 39,467 Accredited | INEC Server = 22,512 Accredited, Ibiono Ibom LGA | Form EC 8D = 64,623 Accredited | INEC Server = 10,369 Accredited, Ika LGA | Form EC 8D = 34,697 Accredited | INEC Server = 10,487 Accredited, Ikono LGA | Form EC 8D = 45,666 Accredited | INEC Server = 10,767 Accredited, Ikot Abasi LGA | Form EC 8D = 24,958 Accredited | INEC Server = 9,956 Accredited andIkot Ekpene LGA | Form EC 8D = 52,335 Accredited | INEC Server = 23,218 Accredited.

    Note also Ini LGA | Form EC 8D = 33,554 Accredited | INEC Server = 6,850 Accredited, Itu LGA | Form EC 8D = 27,808. Accredited | INEC Server = 15,557 Accredited, Mbo LGA | Form EC 8D = 13,853 Accredited | INEC Server = 8,545 Accredited, Mkpat Enin LGA | Form EC 8D = 35,412 Accredited | INEC Server = 7,623 Accredited, Nsit Atai LGA | Form EC 8D = 24,748 Accredited | INEC Server = 9,606 Accredited, Nsit Ibom LGA | Form EC 8D = 13,090 Accredited | INEC Server = 13,088 Accredited, Obot Akara LGA | Form EC 8D = 35,836 Accredited | INEC Server = 13,189 Accredited, Okobo LGA | Form EC 8D = 24,280 Accredited | INEC Server = 13,745 Accredited, Onna LGA | Form EC 8D = 54,050 Accredited | INEC Server = 15,864 Accredited, Oron LGA | Form EC 8D = 27,468 Accredited | INEC Server = 17,142 Accredited, Oruk Anam LGA | Form EC 8D = 81,021 Accredited | INEC Server = 21,753 Accredited, Udung Uko LGA | Form EC 8D = 14,094 Accredited | INEC Server = 11,165 Accredited, Ukanafun LGA | Form EC 8D = 48,271 Accredited | INEC Server = 9,846 Accredited, Uruan LGA | Form EC 8D = 38,006 Accredited | INEC Server = 11,599 Accredited, Urue Offong/Oruko LGA | Form EC 8D = 8,141 Accredited | INEC Server = 5,405 Accredited and Uyo LGA | Form EC 8D = 47,990 Accredited | INEC Server = 38,022 Accredited

    In summary, Total Form EC 8D = 1,158,624 Accredited | Total INEC Server = 437,128 with a wide difference of 721,496, more than 50% error yet Akwa Ibom state was among the states that first published election results!

    Figures do not lie and, if the ‘sanctity of the ballot’ (borrowing the phrase from Obong Victor Attah), and by extension, credibility of last elections were founded on voter accreditation, using Permanent Voter Card machines, then one can rightly assert that there was no election in Akwa Ibom state especially on April 11 considering gross discrepancy between FORM EC 8D, compiled by reportedly compromised INEC staff, and those automatically computed by PVC readers and sent to INEC servers.

    Going forward, none of those sham elections (Governorship and State House of Assembly) held on April 11 would be deemed credible using records from PVC readers’ printout from INEC servers. For instance, it is safe to question Form EC 8E compiled by reportedly compromised INEC staff which says Governor Emmanuel Udom got 996,071 votes. How did he get these outrageous figures when PVC readers printout from INEC servers say there were only 437,128 accredited voters in Akwa Ibom State for the April 11 governorship? Mystery surrounding facts such as this is what the election petition tribunals seek to unravel not mannerism of witnesses or whether they spoke correct grammar or not.

    Ukpong, writes from Uyo.

     

  • 2Face, others on post election campaign

    2Face, others on post election campaign

    Although the 2015 general elections are over, the ‘One Voice Peace Concert’ spearheaded by award-winning singer, 2Face Idibia appears to have more to offer.

    At the Classique Event Center recently, fans were wowed with a collection of hit songs from the artiste’s repertoire, even as 2Face and his team seized the opportunity to sensitise all on the need for post-election involvement in the activities of the nation and its government.

    Speaking exclusively to The Nation, 2Face shed light on the essence of the concert. “We are here to talk to Nigerian youths about peaceful co-existence and also for them to be monitoring governance,” he said.

    According to him, “Over the years, the future of Nigeria has been squandered. But all hope is not lost, we can still rebuild Nigeria. Our generation has really lost a lot. We really want to influence the youths positively.”

    The singer further stated how the concert integrates peaceful co-existence among youths and the general public. “Music is a powerful tool, and it is one of the channels we are using to influence and sensitise the publics,” 2Face adds.

    Acknowledging what the concert stands for, the event planner, Helen Abutu said: “One Voice Peace Concert is a continuation or the second phase of the Vote Not Fight Campaign.”

    Hosted in collaboration with 2Face’s Foundation and other non-governmental organizations, the show also featured performances by artistes such as Reminisce, Olu Maintain, Ice Prince, Sound Sultan, Phyno, Efa, Niyola, YunggreyC, Suspect, DJ Neptune, Joe El, Vector, Uzi, Yemi Alade, Timi Dakolo, Harrysong, Illbliss, Sexy Steel, Naeto C and several others.

  • Senate probes alleged DSS interference in Election Tribunals

    Senate probes alleged DSS interference in Election Tribunals

    •Daura to appear before panel today

    Investigation into the alleged interference in the Rivers State Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja by the Department of State Services (DSS) has commenced in the Senate.

    The upper chamber has invited the Director-General of the DSS, Lawal Daura, to explain the allegation.

    Daura is billed to appear before the Senate Committee on Ethics and Public Petitions, which has been mandated to conduct the investigation today.

    The probe is said to be sequel to a petition by members of the Rivers State House of Assembly to the Senate on the allegation.

    The petition signed by 31 members of the House was referred to the Ethics and Public Petitions Committee last week.

    The petitioners claimed, among others, that the DSS had arrested some officials of the Independent National Election Commission (INEC) and members of the Election Petition Tribunal and subjected them to serious intimidation, harassment and coercion to compromise the independence of the tribunal and pervert justice.

    Chairman of the committee, Senator Samuel Anyanwu, (PDP, Imo East Senatorial District) at the commencement of sitting yesterday warned those involved in the matter against delay.

    Anyanwu said members would demand prompt response to invitations and questions during the probe.

    The chairman said the committee would pay serious attention to allegations of abuse of office against the DSS.

    He, however, noted that the petitioners should provide specific details to assist the committee to conduct a thorough investigation.

    Anyanwu said, “The issue of independence of the judiciary is a very serious pillar in the dispensation of justice.

    “That is why the committee takes the allegation of intimidation of Tribunal members’ very seriously because if the judiciary is intimidated, then the independence is compromised.

    “So we want all details about this allegation supplied to the committee without delay.”

    Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Ikuinyi-Owaji Ibani, who led other members to the committee, defended the petition.

    Ibani noted that INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner in Rivers State, Mrs. Gesila Khan and some other senior officials of the commission were also arrested and detained by the DSS in Abuja.

    He said: “We make bold to say that they lack the power or the authority to invite any judicial officer serving in the Rivers State Election Petition Tribunal for questioning concerning their handling of election petitions pending before them based on some purported petitions from interested parties.”

    “While we commend the stance and efforts of President Muhammadu Buhari to instill discipline, strengthen institutions of State and deepen democratic values where all Nigerians will have equal opportunities, we are appalled by their present clandestine and surreptitious moves aimed at derailing an efficient, transparent and unbiased justice delivery system and thereby bringing the judiciary into disrepute, public ridicule and odium.”

    Ibani added that “embarking on this condemnable mission, the DSS purports to be acting on some pre-arranged petitions from persons who are directly interested in the outcome of the various election Petitions from Rivers State.”

  • Gombe election tribunal begins hearing

    •Counsel explains slow presentation of witnesses 

    Supporters of the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Gombe State, Yahaya Inuwa, have expressed hope that the evidence before the election petition tribunal has rekindled their hope.

    As the hearing began yesterday, the court heard the witnesses presented by the APC.

    Addressing reporters in Gombe, the party’s Secretary, Alhaji Sallau Manu Pindiga, urged supporters to remain confident and steadfast in their quest for justice.

    He said the party was confident that justice would be done.

    Pindiga said even after the declaration of the result of the April election, the party’s supporters were not demoralised, as they had a strong case to reclaim victory.

    Said he: “We have more than enough documents to prove our case that massive election rigging ranging from ballot box snatching to ballot box stuffing and others occurred during the election.”

    Dismissing the activities of a faction in the party,  Pindiga said the activities of fifth columnists in their midst would not vitiate the validity of their case.

    He added: “The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) leadership in Gombe and some disgruntled elements in the state APC are attempting to sabotage our efforts. We know they won’t succeed.”

    Counsel to the APC governorship candidate Mr. Ayoola Ajayi explained reasons for his intermittent presentation of witnesses.

    He said it was tactical.

    Responding to reporters’ questions after the sitting, Ajayi allayed the fears expressed over the ponderous pace of the presentation, saying the legal tactics were deliberate.

    “We are taking the witness the way we feel will be good for our case. We are bringing them gradually. Maybe tomorrow we will bring some more and we will continue that way. It’s just to take care of the circumstance.

    “I told you the other time that we are just starting. Very soon we will take off. You know it’s an election that involves many wards, polling units and the rest of them. You don’t just rush in things like that.”

    According to him, the forensic examination of materials as ordered by the tribunal was still being carried out in some areas.

    Ajayi said they would do their best to meet up with calling the witnesses lined up for the case within the time frame set for them to pursue the case.