Follow Us on Google
From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
Two adhoc Presiding Officers (POs) of the Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC) on Saturday maintained that the Bimodal Voters Accreditation System(BVAS) failed to upload the results of the February 25 presidential election into the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV).
The presiding officers testified as subpoenaed witnesses in the petition challenging the election of President Bola Tinubu by the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) and Atiku Abubakar.
The subpoenaed witnesses who are former National Youth Service Corps members (NYSC), who served as INEC adhoc staff are Alheri Ayuba (PW17) and Sadiat Muhammed Haruna (PW18) who presided over the election at two separate polling units in the Federal Capital Territory(FCT), Abuja.
Before adopting their witness statements, counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission, Dr. Kemi Pinheiro (SAN); Counsel to President Tinubu, Chief Akin Olujinmi (SAN) and that of the All Progressives Congress(APC), Ajibola Fashanu all opposed to their competence to testify in the proceedings.
Counsel to Tinubu, Olujinmi stated, “I opposed to the competence of the witness to teatify. I will advanced reasons earlier canvassed in other subpoenaed witnesses in urging the court to disqualify them.
Other respondents counsel alligned with the submission of Olujinmi in urging the court to disqualify the subpoenaed witnesses.
Regardless, the court urged the witnesses to proceed with their evidence, while adjourning ruling on the objections to the last day of judgment.
Lead counsel to the petitioners, Chief Chris Uche (SAN); who had earlier urged the court to disregard the objections, led the witneeses in their evidence -in- chief.
The first was Alheri Ayuba, who was cross-examined counsel to INEC Oluwakemi Pinheiro.
Pinheiro asked the witness to confirm if she performed her duties diligently on the day of election and that election went on smoothly.
Ayuba agreed that the election went smoothly except with regards to the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System machine which did not transmit scanned copy of results after she clicked “send” on the device.
” Although the election was held peacefully and smoothly, its result could not be transmitted from BVAS to IReV.
She told the court that “apart from issues with BVAS, everything went on smoothly.’
” After sorting out the ballot, I announced results to everybody’s hearing and diligently entered the scores to form EC8A and handed the original to the ward collation officer. Party agents present equally signed the result sheets.
“I however had problems of transmitting the result from BVAS machine to IReV.”
Next to cross examined PW17 was a senior counsel in Tinubu’s legal team, Emmanuel Ukala (SAN).
On the usage of BVAS, APC counsel, Emmanuel Ukala SAN asked the witness to confirm if when the BVAS failure to transmit results was resolved, it showed pending on the device and will be sent to the INEC Results Viewing Portal, IRev later.
“It’s not possible my lord; I could not log in on BVAS not to talk of sending the results,” the witness replied.
Ukala then put it to her that despite the glitch she experienced at her polling unit, a lot of presidential election results were successfully sent to IREV by BVAS machine
He suggested to her that over 94.7 percent of the presidential election results is currently on Irev.
The witness said she wouldn’t know about that, adding “I only operated in my polling unit.”
But Justice Haruna Tsammani told Ukala to “limit” his cross examination to the polling unit where the presiding officer said she served.
He wondered how she can competently speak about results on IRev when she only served at a polling unit.
Ukala replied the judge that he only wanted to pass across his own position on the election to the open court.
The APC legal team asked her if she filled any INEC Form complaining about the BVAS despite Labour Party winning at her polling unit, to which she said there was a form for laying of complaint at the Ward collation centre and “I filled the form stating I was not happy that the BVAS did not transmit the scanned result.”
The APC insisted that the actual name of the presiding officer that operated at the polling unit she identified was Felix Blessing, but the witness disagreed.
Subsequently, the court discharged her from the dock.
It was the turn of Sadiya Mohammed Haruna (PW18), a presiding officer in another polling unit in FCT
Under interrogation by INEC lawyer, Steve Adehi SAN, she admitted that everything went well in her polling unit except the BVAS transmission of result.
INEC accused her of not serving at the polling unit she identified because her appointment letter from the electoral commission stated “ward” but did not specify the polling unit.
She insisted that INEC deployed her to serve at her polling unit.
When Ukala’s turn came, he repeated same question he asked the first witness for today regarding results on the IREV.
“Not really sure. I am only concerned about my polling unit,” Haruna said.
The APC lawyer, S. Umoh SAN told her that the polling unit she mentioned was not the exact place she served, but she denied it.
The court subsequently adjourned to June 13 for continuation of hearing.
