APC MAY TAKE BACK OSUN STATE

APC MAY TAKE BACK OSUN STATE… Loading!!

OSUN GOVERNORSHIP TRIBUNAL: OYETOLA DIDN’T LOSE THE ELECTION, HE LOST THE VOTE COUNT!

👉An analysis of the number of registered voters and the PVC collected by polling units revealed some inconsistencies in the data. Findings from the analysis on the Osun PVC collection data revealed that the total number of PVCs collected for 30 polling units was greater than the total number of registered voters in those polling units. These inconsistencies were recorded in 12 LGAs.

👉Eighty-seven (87) results were not processed on the ERAD, due to some issues. Based on ERAD findings, INEC presiding officers uploaded forms or documents other than Form EC8A as prescribed in the guidelines and manual for the election.

APC MAY TAKE BACK OSUN STATE

👉Blurry images and poorly captured photographs of result sheets were uploaded on the IReV portal, making it impracticable to decipher the number of votes scored by political parties on the uploaded forms. In some cases, the presiding officers uploaded truncated images of result sheets. In other words, the images omitted segments of the result sheets. Contrary to the provisions of the electoral act 2022 and INEC guidelines and regulations, some polling unit level results (Form EC8A) uploaded on the IReV were not stamped or signed by the presiding officer.

👉Based on results entered on the ERAD database, there was a variation in the total number of rejected ballots, and the figures announced by INEC at the final collation.”

👉Sections 47(2) of the Electoral Act says that to vote, the presiding officer shall use the smart card reader or any other technological device that may be prescribed by the commission for the accreditation of voters to “verify, authenticate the intending voter in the manner prescribed by the commission.” For the purpose of the Osun election, INEC had prescribed the BVAS (Bimodal Voters Accreditation System) as the only credible means of accreditation. But from the report gotten from the field, in many of the polling units, BVAS was not used appropriately. It didn’t capture the number of accredited voters. But APC is not relying mainly on the report we got from our polling agents. We also demanded by law for a CTC of the report of BVAS from INEC, and we got it.

👉The CTC of the report of BVAS across 10 LGs in 749 polling units showed that accreditation through BVAS was less than the number of votes cast in those units. By implication, there were more voters than accredited by the BVAS. Let me give a few examples to drive home my point.

At Alusekere Unit 004, Owode Primary School, Ward 5 in Ede North LG where Ademola Adeleke comes from, the total votes cast for that unit was 1,267 but BVAS recorded only 858 as accredited voters. Also, in Ward 5 unit 14, 206 number of votes were recorded for parties against 118 accredited through BVAS. In Unit 15 of the same ward 5 Alusekere, 177 votes were recorded in Form EC8A while the BVAS report says 108 voters were accredited.

So, consistently, there were more voters than BVAS accredited, and those are our issues with the Election Results as declared by INEC

Leave a comment