As Tribunal Reviews Mahmood’s Video On Alleged Electoral Guidelines Breach…

Alex Enumah writes that the highlight of the second week of hearing into petitions against the February 25, 2023 presidential poll, was the review of a video evidence establishing INEC promised actual transmission of election results.

It seems the two major petitioners challenging the return of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu as winner of the February 25 presidential election are not leaving anything to chance in establishing allegations of fraud and corrupt practices perpetuated by the Independent National Electoral Commission ( INEC).

The electoral umpire had declared Tinubu and his party the All Progressives Congress (APC) winner of the presidential election having scored 8,794,726 of lawful majority votes, while the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar was said to have scored 6,984,520 to come second and the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Mr Peter Obi, third with a total votes of 6,101,533.

However, among the allegations in their separate petitions against the election and subsequent declaration of Tinubu as winner of the presidential poll, was that INEC failed to transmit election results real time as promised by its Chairman, Prof Yakubu Mahmood.

While the petitioners have tendered plethora of documentary evidence as well as called on witnesses to prove their allegations that they and not Tinubu won the presidential election, the Labour Party and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi on Friday brought electronic evidence to support their claims that INEC breached its own regulations and guidelines when it arrived at the conclusion that Tinubu won the poll and went ahead to declare him president.

The electronic evidence (three video clips in two flash drives) seems to be the icing on the cake since the hearing began two weeks ago.

At the end of pre-hearing session on May 23, the five-member panel of justices of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PREPEC) led by Justice Haruna Tsammani had given both Atiku and Obi three weeks to tender all vital exhibits as well as call in their witnesses to prove their allegations of rigging in favour of Tinubu as well as claims of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, among others.

In their allegations of non-compliance, the petitioners are insisting that the failure of INEC to transmit the presidential election results real time from the polling unit into the INEC Results Viewing (IReV) portal substantially affect the exercise and the subsequent declaration of Tinubu as winner.

While Atiku on one hand has so far called in 18 witnesses including his agents and subpoenaed adhoc staff of the electoral umpire to prove that results of the presidential election were not transmitted real time unlike results of the Senate and House of Representatives; which held simultaneously with the presidential poll, Obi, on the other hand, apart from tendering plethora of exhibits in support of his case last Friday brought in video evidence to prove that INEC indeed violated its own regulations and guidelines in declaring Tinubu as winner of the February 25 presidential poll.

The video evidence contained different clips of a press conference by INEC boss, Mahmood; interview by INEC’s Commissioner in charge of Information and Voter Education, Mr Festus Okoye and Tinubu addressing journalists after visiting former President Muhammadu Buhari in Daura, Katsina State.

The electronic evidence were brought before the court and tendered by a staff of Channels Television, which had been subpoenaed by the court to give evidence.

Although, all the respondents; INEC, Tinubu and APC, had through their lawyers objected to the competence of the witness as well as the exhibits, the court however, held that the witness can go ahead with his statement, after the electronic evidence were admitted as exhibits, stating that ruling on their objections would be delivered alongside the final judgment.

The two flash drives were tendered by one Lucky Obewo Isawode, a Senior Reporter/Editor, Channels Television.

At a stage during the review, counsel to the LP and Obi, Mr Jibrin Okutepa, had asked that the video be stopped and move to the next scene after he felt that he has established what he wanted with the earlier scene but, the court responded by saying, “No let’s watch the full video. We want to see everything”.

Even when Okutepa reminded the court that the witness was not a “star witness” and as such cannot spend 20 minutes for his testimony, Justice Tsammani declined, “No, I want to watch it and see everything and hear everything he said”.

When Okutepa then demanded for more time, the court held that, “No problem, videos played would not be counted in your time”.

In the first clip, which was played before the five justices, litigants and their supporters and journalists watching the proceedings in the open court, Mahmood was seen assuring Nigerians on the sacrosanctity of electronic transmission of results in the 2023 general elections.

The INEC boss could be heard in the video clip as saying there is no going back on the use of BVAS machines and on real time transmission of the results from the polling booths to the INEC Server.

As if corroborating Mahmood, the Commissioner for Information and Voter Education, Mr Festus Okoye, in his own interview also on Channels television confirmed the two forms of collation of election results to include transmission from polling units, which would be taken physically to the ward collation cente.

Okoye had said “if there is a dispute, you refer back to the electronically transmitted results”.

Another clip also showed President Tinubu speaking with journalists where he had announced Senator Kashim Shettima as his substantive running-mate on July 10, 2022.

Tinubu had earlier picked one Kabir Masari as place holder vice presidential candidate, while submitting his nomination form to INEC.

Before Shettima’s adoption as Vice Presidential candidate, he was nominated by his party as its candidate for Borno Central Senatorial election.

The petitioners are arguing that the fact that Tinubu nominated Shettima as Vice presidential candidate while he was still senatorial candidate of the APC violated the electoral laws and as such their participation in the February 25 presidential election ought to be declared unlawful, illegal, null and void.

Recall INEC, Tinubu and APC had on Friday objected to the tendering and subsequent playing of the electronic evidence aimed at establishing that the electoral umpire violated its own regulations and guidelines for the February 25 presidential election.

Shortly after the oath was administered on the witness, Obi’s lawyer, Jibrin Okutepa, was about leading the witness to adopt his earlier written deposition and present a video recording of statements made by Mahmood and INEC’s National Commissioner, Okoye, when the respondents rose in opposition.

Tinubu and Shettima’s lawyer, Chief Akin Olujimi, argued that the witness and his testimony was not pre-listed and front-loaded in time, according to electoral law and as such should not be admitted by the court.

Lawyers to INEC and APC also argued along same lines in objecting to the hearing of the witness and his evidence.

It was the claim of the respondents that they ought to know what is contained in the evidence brought before the court so as to effectively cross examine the witness.

Reacting, Okutepa urged the court to dismiss the objections claiming that there is no law requiring the petitioners to avail them the content of the evidence, adding that when the recorded videos are played in the open court then the respondents can ask relevant questions.

In a short ruling, presiding Justice, Haruna Tsammani, held that ruling has been reserved till final address and ordered the witness to proceed with his adoption of deposition and subsequent video presentation.

However, the court noted that since the proceedings have far gone into the day, parties should return the following day being Saturday for the presentation of the video evidence.