Atiku’s Witnesses Insist Results not Transmitted to IReV at Polling Units

*As Obi tenders more documents to prove petition

Alex Enumah in Abuja

As hearing resume on Monday in the petition of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP’s) candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, against the election of President Bola Tinubu, witnesses who appeared before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PREPEC), have maintained the claims of the petitioners that results from the February 25, presidential election were not transmitted from the polling units to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC’s) Viewing Portals (IReV).

Amongst the allegations of irregularities and substantial non-compliance made by Atiku and PDP in their petition against the recent presidential election was that INEC violated its own regulations and guidelines when it failed to transmit results of the election directly to the IReV from the various polling units.

At last week’s proceedings Atiku and PDP called a total of six witnesses who have evidence of irregularities and corrupt practices and how they were compelled to sign the results against their wish.

At the resume hearing on Monday June 6, the petitioners called in four witnesses, who gave evidence on the alleged failure of INEC to transmit results from polling units directly to the IReV.

In his evidence in Chief, one Alhaji Mohammed Madaki, who is the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Chairman of the PDP, said that, “it was not the polling units results captured on picture by the Bi-modal Verification Accreditation System (BVAS) machine that was uploaded to IReV”, adding that, “uploading did not take place at the polling units”.

Madaki explained that the inability of the presiding officers to transmit results at the polling units was due to the failure of the BVAS machine.

while stating that Tinubu did not score 25% of votes cast in the FCT and as such ought not to have been returned as president, admitted also that his candidate did not score 25% in the FCT and was not entitled to be returned as president.

Similarly, another witness from the FCT, Mr Abraham David, who acted as the petitioners’ Collation Agent in the FCT, told the court that “transmission failed” at the polling units.

According to him, apart from his polling units in Wuse Zone four, some other polling units he visited also experienced the same failure of transmission.

The witness claimed that Atiku scored 25% of the votes cast in the FCT but was denied due to unlawful votes collated in favour of Tinubu by INEC officials at the polling units.

However, during cross examination, the witness admitted not stating the figure of the alleged unlawful votes in his witness statement on oath.

In addition, the witness disclosed that he does not know the names of INEC staff “that did not perform their task properly.

Also testifying, the Collation Agent of the PDP in Nasarawa State, Mr Ibrahim Hamza, while corroborating the evidence of the other witnesses observed that the collated election result sheet before him in the court has been altered.

“My Lord, I can see cancellation here, the one I signed was a clear copy. Probably after I signed they cancelled it.”

He further told the court that INEC staff could not transmit results to the IReV because the system failed during the process of uploading.

In addition, he alleged that PDP agents in Nasarawa State were given copies of Form EC8A after results were imputed by INEC officials.

“We signed the results under duress to enable us obtain a copy. Signing the result sheet was made a condition for getting a copy of the results of the election in the state”.

Although, the Labour Party (LP) won the presidential poll in Nasarawa State, Hamza urged the PREPEC to disregard the results, adding that they have the authentic results with the National Agent which showed that Atiku actually won the state.

“There was a lot of abuse, due process was not followed, I had to sign because I wanted a copy of the results”, he said.

He however admitted that he did not visit all the polling units in the state where the alleged malpractices took place.

Meanwhile, the petitioners’witness from Rivers States, one time Minister of Transportation Dr. Abiye Sekibo, good the court that disturbances characterized the presidential poll in Rivers State.

He also alleged that the figures announced by INEC were not the true reflection of the wishes of the voters on February 25 in respect of the presidential election.

while stating that he transversed 20 polling units in Rivers state he noted that he could not enter Obi/Akpo LGA because of the level of violence there, adding that he was not present in all the polling units where irregularities occurred.

During cross examination by APC’s lawyer, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the witness said that he did not mention the votes he believed PDP scored in his witness statement on oath.

He also admitted not mentioning the names of agents who perpetrated violence in his statement.

Meanwhile the presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP), Mr Peter Obi has tendered additional documentary evidences from eight States to establish his allegations of rigging and other electoral malpractices in the February 25 presidential election.

The additional states include; Ebonyi, Nasarawa, Delta, Kaduna, Imo, Ondo, Sokoto, and Kogi.

At last week’s proceedings Obi and his party had tendered documents from 12 states amongst whom are; Adamawa, Bayelsa, Oyo, Edo, Lagos and Akwa Ibom, Rivers, Benue, Cross River, Niger, Osun and Ekiti

The exhibits comprising forms EC8A used in the February 25 presidential election and certified by the National Electoral Commission INEC as true copies of the original were admitted as exhibits.

A breakdown of the fresh exhibits revealed that the forms EC8A were admitted in 13 Local Government Areas of Ebonyi, Delta state 25 local governments Areas, Kaduna 23 local governments Areas, Imo 27 local governments Areas, 26 local government of Osun, 18 local governments Areas of Ondo, 13 local government Areas of Nasarawa state, 7 local government Areas of Sokoto state and 21 Local Government Areas of Kogi state. 

Meanwhile, all the respondents; INEC, Tinubu and his Vice, Senator kashim Shettima and the APC, hinted that they would be objecting to the admissibility of the documents at the final stage of address.

Earlier, the petitioners through their lawyer, Mr Patrick Ikweto, SAN, had attempted to move an application dated June 2, wherein they claimed they have raised 12 salient questions for INEC to answer.

Ikweto stated that the “issues are germain to the trial” and prayed the court for it to be heard on Tuesday.

But, all the respondents claimed that they will be objecting to the application and will be doing so within the time allowed by the law.

Meanwhile the five man panel of justice headed by Justice Haruna Tsammani have adjourned to June, 6 for continuation of hearing.