*Demands Full Server Logs and Backend Audit Alleges Pre-Programming in NBA Election Petition
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/ELLAN.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
Lateef Omoyemi Akangbe, SAN, has filed a formal election petition before the Nigerian Bar Association National Officers Election Appeal Committee holden at Abuja, challenging the declaration of Mrs Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, as winner of the July 18, 2026, election to the office of President of the Nigerian Bar Association, on the ground that the election “was invalid by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Nigerian Bar Association 2015, as amended, and with the guidelines issued by the ECNBA.”
The petition names three respondents: the Incorporated Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association as 1st Respondent, the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association as 2nd Respondent, and Mrs Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, as 3rd Respondent.
The petition records the results announced by the ECNBA on July 20, 2026: Mrs Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, 12,317 votes (47.18 per cent); Mr Lateef Omoyemi Akangbe, SAN, 7,934 votes (30.39 per cent); and Mr Olumuyiwa Akinboro, SAN, 5,855 votes (22.43 per cent).
All three had been endorsed as qualified candidates in the ECNBA document titled “2026 Final List of Qualified Candidates for the 2026 NBA General Elections” dated May 28, 2026.
The petition states that the ECNBA published revised guidelines on July 16, 2026, providing that voting would run from 12:00 am on July 18 to 11:59 pm using the website https://ecnba.org.ng/vote/ecnba-ovs-main/.
“At the commencement of elections on 18th July 2026 and within 10 minutes of voting, the website went down and was down for more than seven hours, during which period, every voter was unable to vote,” the petition states.
Akangbe pleads that upon becoming aware of the malfunction he issued a statement calling for the suspension of the elections, addressed to the ECNBA, and gives the Committee notice to produce that statement, dated July 18, 2026, at 2:15 am WAT.
On the cyberattack explanation, the petition is pointed: “It was not until after the 2nd Respondent sent an email at 3:01am on the 18th of July 2026 informing the voters that there was a coordinated cyberattack of the website used for voting. The claim that there was a cyberattack has yet to be verified.”
By a further email at 7:42 am, the ECNBA apologised and advised that voting would recommence at 7:35 am and run for 24 hours from that time.
The petition raises what may be its most serious structural objection.
“Following the malfunction, the 2nd Respondent did not indicate who had previously voted or for whom, before it sent another email advising that it was migrating the voting platform to a different website, www.ecnbaovs.org.ng, which had neither been agreed to nor ratified by the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the NBA,” the petition states.
“Further, this migration had not been agreed to by the candidates. It had not been tested by the IT representatives of the candidates, nor had the backend, the hidden part of a computer system, website, or app that users do not see, been verified by the candidates to ascertain and ensure that it was free from any pre-programming in favour of any of the candidates,” it states.
The petition also lists multiple URLs the ECNBA appeared to deploy during the election, including https://ecnba.org.ng/vote/ecnba-ovs-main/, https://ecnba.org.ng/vote/ecnba-ovs-main/php.index, and a mailing-manager click-through link, stating that “the use of different websites confused a majority of the voting members, as details of different websites kept circulating on various social media platforms.”
The petition sets out the allegation of pre-programming in careful terms.
“While the 2nd Respondent chose to allow live viewing of the election results which claimed to be refreshed every 10 minutes, this decision exposed a peculiar trend: the votes allocated to the 3rd Respondent, who was declared the Election winner, exhibited an almost precise geometric progression at the top of each hour throughout the majority of the Election,” the petition states.
Screenshots of the results displayed on www.ecnbaovs.org.ng, taken at various intervals during the election, are pleaded.
“Following an expert analysis and the fact that the Petitioner’s IT personnel was deprived from accessing critical information, he verily believes that the pattern of consistent and predictable vote increases indicated the likely pre-programming of the system. This finding casts serious doubt on the integrity of the Election process,” the petition states.
The basis of that belief is stated directly: “The Petitioner’s belief is premised on the fact that his IT expert was not allowed to observe, real-time, how the voting was progressing from the backend, despite the 2nd Respondent’s agreement to allow all candidates’ IT experts to monitor how the votes were allotted.”
The petition details the OTP failure that has become the central grievance of the election.
It states that under the revised guidelines of July 16, voters required an OTP authenticating their Supreme Court Numbers to be able to vote.
“In the process of the elections, the petitioner began receiving calls from his supporters all over the country, who were eager and ready to vote but to whom the 1st Respondent had failed to send OTPs to authenticate them to vote for him,” the petition states.
It pleads the ECNBA’s own admission: “At 5:35pm on the 18th of July 2026, the 2nd Respondent issued an email advisory to voters experiencing delays in receiving the SMS One-Time Password required to participate in the ongoing 2026 NBA National Elections. The 2nd Respondent admitted to the delay and non-receipt of OTPs in the said email advisory.”
That advisory directed voters who did not receive an OTP within five minutes to log out completely, wait twenty minutes, then log in and request a fresh OTP, warning that repeated requests would further congest the system. It also advised voters to check spam folders, verify registered phone numbers, disable “Do Not Disturb,” and use the OTP immediately as it expires quickly, and it directed complaints to a helpdesk on 08144274159, 09161044495 and 08104510797. It was signed by Aham Ejelam, SAN, Chairman, and Ibrahim Aliyu Nassarawa, Esq., Secretary.
The petition makes a striking personal averment: “The Petitioner states that, even as a candidate for the election of the office of President of the Nigerian Bar Association, he was unable to vote for himself at the elections on 18th July 2026.”
The petition sets out the arithmetic of disenfranchisement.
“On 10 July 2026, the 1st Respondent published the eligible voters list, and the list indicated that 82,213 members were eligible to vote,” it states.
“Out of the 82,213 eligible voters, only 26,106 were permitted by the 1st Respondent to cast their votes on 18th July 2026, leaving some 56,107 eligible voters disenfranchised,” the petition states.
Akangbe claims a specific number among them: “The Petitioner states that he had over twenty-five thousand voters who were prepared to vote for him but were unable to vote as a result of the failure of the 1st Respondent to send the OTPs to these eligible voters.”
He pleads the causal consequence: “With over twenty-five thousand eligible and willing voters who were prevented from voting because of the non-compliance, if these voters had been allowed to vote, their voting would have substantially affected the eventual results declared on 20th July 2026.”
And on the wider figure: “If the 56,107 voters that were unable to vote were allowed to vote had they received their OTPs timeously in compliance with the 1st Respondent’s revised guidelines of 16 July 2026, that number of votes would have substantially affected the outcome and results of the election one way or another.”
The petition makes a direct allegation of selective delivery.
“On the day of the election, the Petitioner received calls from various supporters who were unable to vote because of the failure of receiving OTPs. The Petitioner states that while he was complaining of the non-delivery of the OTPs, the votes for the 3rd Respondent steadily kept increasing, as if to say the OTPs were deliberately being sent to only her supporters and thereby disenfranchising the Petitioner’s supporters who at the time were willing to vote,” the petition states.
It also pleads the public record: “Members of the Nigerian Bar Association on various lawyer groups on social media openly expressed their frustration at not being able to vote as a result of not having received their OTPs.”
The petition states that the election was advertised to commence at 12:00 am and end at 11:59 pm on Saturday, July 18, per the ECNBA’s email of July 16.
“However, voting continued into the early hours of Sunday, 19th July 2026, with the number of votes continuing to increase,” it states.
“This extension beyond the advertised timeline, without proper notice or explanation, further casts doubt on the fairness and transparency of the election process. Being an online voting method, the start and end time ought to have been programmed by the 2nd Respondent and ought to have terminated automatically. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents admitted that the period allotted for the election was exceeded,” the petition states.
The petition invokes the constitutional standard: “The Constitution mandates that when electronic voting is adopted, the 2nd Respondent shall engage the services of competent and credible service providers to provide the electronic voting platform and shall conduct the elections in a transparent and fair manner in accordance with clearly published guidelines.”
“The anomalies and irregularities observed demonstrate a failure to comply with these constitutional requirements. The use of unrelated platforms, unexplained vote tally discrepancies, and issues of pre-programming and data manipulation indicate that the election was neither transparent nor fair,” it states.
The petition gives the ECNBA notice to produce a redacted audit of the election and a list of documents running to more than thirty categories.
These include the voters’ list used for the election; the final result sheet relied upon in declaring the winner; full access to server and application log files; network traffic logs and all incident response documentation; copies of all data backups taken before, during and after the election; system performance data including server response times and load statistics; complete database records including voter information and voting transactions; detailed logs of all voter authentication attempts, successful or not; a complete record of voting timestamps for all cast ballots; documents relating to any changes made to the voting system during or immediately after the election; logs of all system errors including timeouts and database freezes; and logs of all PNG image uploads to the portal including timestamps, file sizes and the account or process responsible.
Critically, the petition also demands “documentation on the process and protocols used to transfer data from the primary election platform (electionbuddy.com) to the display portal (go.ecnba.org),” all third-party service logs and reports, all formal records of voter complaints, information on security measures and protocols, and “records of all individuals who had administrative access to the voting system/platform during the Election.”
It further demands the final result sheet at the ECNBA’s backend servers, the spool of the vote tallies, “the metadata showing the IP and MAC addresses of the devices used in voting,” One-Time Password submission and delivery status records, “send, bounce, open and click records for the notices of 18 July 2026,” and impact assessment, processing records, breach assessment and processor agreement documentation.
The petition puts the ECNBA on notice of compulsory process: “Upon the failure to produce the documents mentioned above, the Petitioner shall subpoena the 2nd Respondent to provide redacted documents in accordance with the common law rules of evidence and the Nigerian Data Protection Act.”
Anticipating that the ECNBA may resist disclosure on privacy grounds, the petition pre-empts the objection by pleading the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023.
It avers that consent of data subjects is not the sole lawful basis for processing personal data; that processing is lawful where necessary for compliance with a legal obligation, for the performance of a task carried out in the exercise of official authority, or for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or a third party to whom the data is disclosed.
It further pleads the provision permitting a non-profit association to process sensitive personal data in the course of its legitimate activities with appropriate safeguards, where the processing relates solely to members or former members and the data is not disclosed outside the entity without explicit consent.
The petition concludes its grounds with the statutory test for invalidating an election: “The irregularities, breaches and non-compliance are substantial and systemic to such an extent that it affected the outcome of the election.”
The petition is accompanied by a Witness Statement on Oath deposed to by Akangbe himself, in which he states: “The information deposed to by me are facts within my personal knowledge, facts passed on to me by my said supporters, supervisors and agents on the field working during the election of 18th July 2026, and which facts I verily believe to be true.”
Akangbe is described in the petition as a legal practitioner of the 7th Floor, St. Nicholas Building, Catholic Mission Street, Lagos Island.
The address for service within jurisdiction is Hanafi & Associates, 1st Floor, Coscharis Plaza, 6 Faskari Street, Area 3, Garki, Abuja.
Service is directed on the 1st Respondent at NBA House, Plot 1101, Muhammadu Buhari Way, Central Business District, Abuja; the 2nd Respondent at the ECNBA Secretariat, NBA House, 24 Oro Ago Street, Garki, Abuja; and the 3rd Respondent at 15 Military Street, Onikan, Lagos.
The petition is brought before the Nigerian Bar Association National Officers Election Appeal Committee, holden at Abuja.
“Order Justice Omolaye-Ajileye’s Electronic Evidence Books Now” — Essential Guides On Evidence Act, Case Law And Digital Proof
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
______________________________________________________________________
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
