Coalition in Defence of Nigerian Democracy and Constitution (CDNDC) has warned the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) not to use e-collation of results in the forthcoming governorship elections in Edo and Ondo States.
The group, in a statement issued yesterday in Abuja by its co-convener, Mr Ariyo-Dare Atoye, said the planned use of the new platform was capable of being manipulated to undermine the integrity of the elections.
According to the group, “We wish to urgently alert Nigerians and all stakeholders in our electoral process to the fact that the planned application of e-collation of results is not backed by the Electoral Act, and that it has not been tested in smaller elections to ascertain its effectiveness.
“Consequently, we fear that it may be hijacked, manipulated and used to undermine the credibility of results in the forthcoming Edo and Ondo States governorship elections.”
The group recalled how the INEC had, against genuine concerns, informed suspicions and well-known global best practices, deployed an untested Smart Card Readers (SCR) technology on a large scale for the conduct of the 2015 general elections.
“It was an innovation never before tested in any local or smaller election to ascertain its efficiency and reliability. It was hurriedly deployed against the rule of science and technology, and the end result for voters’ accreditation was a monumental failure,” it stated.
The group continued: “Although the INEC has continued to conceal the data (performance of the card readers) from the public, we have it on good authority, including some information at our disposal, that the failure rate of the SCR accreditation was well over 60 per cent.
“We sincerely urge the commission to publish the correct figures should it consider our assertion to be wrong. For instance, we are aware that the SCR achieved less than 16 per cent success rate in Kano State for the 2015 Governorship election.
“Consequently, we are worried by the current plan of INEC to consolidate and expand the function of the SCR for the purpose of electronic collation and electronic transmission of results, while ignoring previous constraints.
“This proposed e-platform is even the most sensitive aspect of any election and it is the stage at which elections are seriously manipulated. It is therefore curious that the INEC intends to introduce another “technological-expansion” without considering the laws guiding this process.”
CDNDC referred to the relevant sections of the Electoral Act on collation and transmission, to wit: 63 (I), which says that “The Presiding Officer shall, after counting the votes at the polling unit, enter the votes scored by each candidate in a form to be prescribed by the Commission as the case may be.
“(2) The form shall be signed and stamped by the Presiding Officer and counter signed by the candidates or their polling agents where available at the polling unit.
(3) The Presiding Officer shall give to the Polling Agents and the police officer where available a copy each of the completed forms after it has been duly signed as provided in subsection (2) ofthis section.
(4)The Presiding Officer shall count and announce the result at the polling unit.
“Section 64. A candidate or polling agent may, where present at a polling unit when counting of votes is completed by the Presiding Officer, demand to have the votes recounted provided that the presiding Officer shall cause the votes to be so recounted only once.
“Section 65. After the recording of the result of the election, the Presiding Officer shall announce the result and deliver same and election materials under security to such persons as may be prescribed by the Commission.
According to the group, “As registered voters and concerned Nigerians, we are therefore compelled to ask the INEC if it is logical, reasonable and acceptable to contemplate the introduction of another electronic platform at this juncture when it is yet to:
“I. Perfect the strict use of the SCR, both in law (Electoral Act) and as sole instrument for accreditation to become a standard practice;
“II. Come clean and give the account of performance of the SCR in the last general elections.”
Expressing confidence that the SCR data will give Nigerians the needed confidence, CDNDC however said its was saddened by the fact that “the commission is toeing a familiar inglorious path of using an untested technology for some major elections as it did with the SCR for the 2015 general elections.
,The same INEC had, in the last one year, conducted over 130 other elections without considering it necessary to test-run the use of e-collation and e-transmission to determine their efficiency and suitability.
“We strongly disagree with INEC that Edo and Ondo States governorship polls should be used to test this new expansion.”
The group added: “From our own fair assessment, we could deduce from the statements and body language of the INEC Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, that he is not fully convinced of this new innovation, while the commission appears ill-prepared to do the necessary expansion of the SCR.
“Read him: ‘What difference do we want to make to the use of the card readers? We are looking at the possibility of improving on the functionality of the card readers particularly on the biometric side so that when you placed you index finger on our machine, it can immediately authenticate you without necessarily going through the incidence form before election. In addition to that, we are also looking at the possibility of making the card reader facilitate e-collation, e-transmission of results from the polling unit to the ward, local government and finally to the collation centres.’
According to the group, “The repetitious use of ‘we are looking at the possibility of….’ may significantly point to the fact that the INEC is inadequately prepared to test this e-platform. It is therefore dangerous to be moving from one technological innovation to the other without perfecting the previous one.
“It should also be noted that in the same breath, the INEC is also assuring the nation that it will only conduct elections based on the constitution and the electoral guidelines.
“On this, we wish to ask why is the INEC not interested in seeking a clear and an unambiguous amendment to the Electoral Act to make solid provisions for e-platform. Can the Electoral Act, in its present form, accommodate e-transmission and e-collation without an amendment?
“We wish to remind the commission of the leading judgment of Justice Cletus Nweze in the case of Edward Okereke v Dave Umahi wherein the Supreme Court held that: ‘Indeed, since the Guidelines and Manual, which authorised the use and deployment of the electronic Card Reader Machine, were made in exercise of the powers conferred by the Electoral Act, the said Card Reader cannot, logically, depose or dethrone the Voters’ Register whose judicial roots are, firmly, embedded or entrenched in the selfsame Electoral Act from which it (the Voters’ Register) directly derives its sustenance and currency….
“Since the National Assembly has not deleted the provision of Section 49 of the Electoral Act (2010), which allows manual accreditation, it would be wrong for any petitioner to seek to rely solely on the report of the Card Reader (which is intended as a supplementary measure to the already provided means of accreditation) to prove over-voting.”
CDNCD posited that “it is difficult! at this juncture, to trust the judgment of the INEC on this latest innovation. It is still fresh in our memories the assurances the commission gave the National Assembly, the nation and the international community in the defence of the SCR.
“The IINEC had promised that immediately accreditation was over, the total number of accredited voters would be fed into its server in Abuja. But more than 16 months after the general elections were concluded, the INEC is still not bold to release the SCR data because the outcome, as a big failure, will alarm its foreign partners and the public.”
