• How I rescued INEC staff from attack over failure to upload results –PDP witness

 

From Godwin Tea, Abuja

Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Atiku Abubakar have called their first subpoenaed witness who told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) how Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) failed to transmit results of the disputed election real time as promised.

The witness, Ndubisi Nwobu, from Anambra State, an ad hoc staff of the commission, gave his evidence amid objections raised by counsel to the respondents against his testimony.

It was his evidence-in-chief that for his quick intervention, some staff of the commission would have been attacked for their failure to upload results real time.

The respondents appeared unsettled when the petitioners called the first subpoenaed witness, saying they were not prepared to cross examine the witness having been served the witness statement only, yesterday. The respondents, through their counsel, objected to the taking of the evidence of the witness who was said to be an ad hoc staff of INEC during the presidential election.

Before his evidence-in-chief, lead counsel to the petitioners, tendered some electoral documents from 10 local government areas in Kogi State.

He informed the court that his clients have three subpoenaed witnesses to testify in their petition.

However, immediately the witness entered the witness box and before he could take his oath, counsel to INEC objected to the hearing of his evidence.

He informed the court that he was only served this morning (yesterday) with the statement of the witness and as such would have to study the statement to do a thorough cross examination.

His position was shared by President Biola Tinubu and All Progressives Congress’ (APC) lawyer, who added that he was only served barely 20 minutes ago with the statement and has not seen what it contains.

Responding, petitioners argued that with a subpoenaed witness, they were not supposed to front-load their statement to the respondents, adding that there was nothing strange in the statement of the witness to warrant an adjournment.

The counsel pleaded with the court to take at least one of the subpoenaed witnesses so as to judiciously make use of the time allotted it because the adjournment would eat into their allotted time.

Responding, Chairman of the court, Haruna Tsammani, proposed standing down trial for 30 minutes to enable respondents look at the documents and thereby cross examined the first subpoenaed witness.

The suggestion did not, however, go down well with INEC, whose counsel, insisted that the witness cannot be taken because the witness “is said to be an ad hoc staff of the commission” and as such he would have to go and look at INEC’s records to enable him prepare adequately.

Following the respondents insistence, counsel to petitioner urged the court to adjourned till tomorrow for the calling of the three subpoenaed witnesses.

Nwobu told the court that he was forced to sign the Form EC8D because it became evident that if he did not sign, INEC would not give him a copy. Form EC8D is the result sheet for states.

Under cross examination by INEC’s counsel, the witness told the court that although the election was peaceful at his polling unit, INEC officials refused to upload the results to INEC Result Verification Portal (IREV).

According to him, results of the election were entered into the forms EC8A at the polling units but were not transmitted real time into the IReV because of the failure of the BVAS machines.

He told the panel that but for his intervention some staff of INEC would have been attacked due to their inability to upload results real time. “There was no real time transmission of results as we were promised by INEC,” he said.

He also told the court that he visited about 30 out of the 4,720 polling units in Anambra.

The trial continues today.