Amazon has the legal right to allow Peter obi LP to get Inec data from their Amazon clowd because Inec refused to obey court order to allow Peter obi LP get access to the BVAS data

[color=#006600][/color]
In a petition filed Tuesday at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), Mr Obi told the court that the election of Tinubu was invalid by reason of corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 by INEC.
He stated that due to the manifest non-compliance by INEC with the Electoral Act and specific requirements of the Regulations for the conduct of the Presidential election, by the INEC failing, refusing, and neglecting to instantly transmit and upload the result of that election electronically to the iRev from the BVAS, INEC violated the integrity and safety measures entrenched for the conduct of the said election.
Fidelity Leaderboard
Obi further stated that due to INEC’s refusal and neglect to upload and transmit the result of the election in the polling units to the IReV as required by law on the day of the election, INEC suppressed the actual scores obtained by the Labour Party.
Peter Obi told the court that he has in his possession a Spread Sheet containing the Polling Units Codes and details of the aforesaid Eighteen Thousand and Eighty-Eight Polling Units, as well as the authentic results in the aforesaid Eighteen Thousand and Eighty­ Eight Polling Units.
He added that in Benue State, INEC “mischievously uploaded blurred Forms EC8A allegedly for Polling Units to suppress the lawful result of the election in the Polling Units. The Petitioners shall also at trial rely on a Forensic Report of the Presidential Election held in Polling Units in Benue State.”
In Rivers State during the collation exercise at the Federal level, INEC announced the scores of the Labour Party as 175,071 votes and the APC as having 231,591 votes. However, by the actual scores obtained at the polling units, Labour Party’s lawful votes in Rivers State are 205,110 votes, while APCs’ score ought to be 84,108 votes.
Obi further contend that if INEC had, as it was mandated to do, utilised the scores recorded on the Forms EC8A as against the fictitious Forms uploaded on the IReV, the Petitioners Obi would have won Rivers State.
Similarly, in Benne State, INEC whilst suppressing the lawful votes obtained by the Labour Party, announced that Labour Party scores from the polling units in Benue State is 308,372 votes. APC’s score was falsely announced as being 310,468 votes. However, the actual scores of Labour Party from the polling units in Benne State was 329,003 votes, while APC scores were 300,421 votes.
‘By the unlawful announcement made by INEC, they denied me being the winner of the election in Benue State’, Obi told the court. He told the court has obtained “forensic analysis of the election for Rivers State and Benue State made pursuant to the inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.”
Whilst purportedly acting under the cover of uploading the result of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 on the iRev, INEC “embarked and are still embarking on massive misrepresentation and manipulation by uploading fictitious results in Polling Units where there were no elections as well as uploading incorrect results. The actual scores of the Petitioners have been reduced, tampered with, and falsely represented in the false election results uploaded in the iRev.”
Obi said he has Forensic Report of the election result showing his actual scores obtained from the Polling Units and from the result of the election pursuant to the Inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.
scores were 300,421 votes.
‘By the unlawful announcement made by INEC, they denied me being the winner of the election in Benue State’, Obi told the court. He told the court has obtained “forensic analysis of the election for Rivers State and Benue State made pursuant to the inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.”
Whilst purportedly acting under the cover of uploading the result of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 on the iRev, INEC “embarked and are still embarking on massive misrepresentation and manipulation by uploading fictitious results in Polling Units where there were no elections as well as uploading incorrect results. The actual scores of the Petitioners have been reduced, tampered with, and falsely represented in the false election results uploaded in the iRev.”
Obi said he has Forensic Report of the election result showing his actual scores obtained from the Polling Units and from the result of the election pursuant to the Inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.
The scores obtained by the Labour Party were unlawfully reduced and added by INEC to the scores of the APC. Further, INEC deliberately uploaded blurred result which were in favour of the Labour Party on the iRev in a bid to conceal them.
Obi asked the court to deduct these unlawful scores added to the APC and for those scores which were legitimately obtained by the Labour Party to be credited to the Labour Partys’ scores. When the scores unlawfully added to the APC are deducted, the Labour Party will have the highest number of votes in the election, as shown in the Forensic Report.
“When the results of Polling Units, Wards, Local Governments, States are properly tabulated and calculated as required by the Electoral Act and the Regulations and Guidelines for election, the overall results of the election and the percentages scored by the Political Parties will show that the Labour Party won the Presidential election of 25 February 2023.”
“From the correct Polling Unit result transmitted electronically and supported by the accreditation on the BVAS, the Labour Party won the election”, according to the Inspection Reports as well as Forensic/Expert analysis pursuant to the orders of the Court.
Obi also claimed that votes cast in the Poling Units in Ekiti State, Oyo State, Ondo State, Taraba State, Osun State, Kano State, Rivers State, Borno State, Katsina State, Kwara State, Gombe State, Yobe State and Niger State exceeded the number of voters accredited on the BVAS in those states.
“The computation and declaration of the result of the election, based on the uploaded results, the votes recorded for the APC did not comply with the legitimate process for computation of the result and disfavoured the Petitioners in RIVERS, LAGOS, TARABA, BENUE, ADAMAWA, IMO, BAUCHI, BORNO, KADUNA, PLATEAU and OTHER STATES OF THE FEDERATION.
In declaring the result of the election, INEC violated its own Regulations when it announced the result of the elections despite the fact that at the time of the said announcement or declaration, the totality of the Polling Unit results was yet to be fully scanned, uploaded and transmitted electronically as required by the Electoral Act, Obi said.
“The results and details recorded in the Forms EC8A. ECSB. EC8C. ECSD and ECSE which formed the basis of the declared result were not the product of compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s Regulations mandating the process of accreditation, voting, counting, recording of votes, and uploading to the INEC’s iRev Portal and the backend virtual server installed to ensure a uniform process.
Obi and the Labour Party further contend that when the purported scores recorded in the polling units where the above instances of over­ voting occurred are deducted from the alleged votes obtained by Bola Tinubu and on which INEC based the hurried declaration of Tinubu as the winner of the election, the margin of the purported lead between the APC and the Labour Party will be far less than the number of voters who ought to legitimately vote in those polling units.
Mr Obi stated that instances of over-voting in the conduct of the Presidential election held on 25th February 2023 occurred in more places than stated on the Form EC40G(iii), according to the Report of the BYAS Accreditation in the polling units.
The above instances of non-compliance substantially affected the outcome of the election, in that if these instances did not occur in the conduct of the Presidential election, the labour Party would have emerged the winners of the said election. Obi said.
Below are the Regulations for the conduct of the Presidential election which Obi claimed were violated by INEC
By the Regulations, voting was to be in accordance with the Continuous Accreditation and Voting System (CAVS) and no person was to be allowed to vote at any Polling Unit other than the one at which his or her name was disclosed on the Register of Voters. The intending voter was then to present the Permanent Voters Card (PVC) to INEC’s staff who was to verify. same using BVAS.
(i) Checking the Permanent Voter’s Card (PVC) of the voter;
(ii) Positive identification of the voter in the BVAS;
(iii) Authentication of the voter by matching his/her fingerprints or face (facial recognition) using the BVAS;
(iv) Positive identification of the voter in the Register of voters;
(v) Completion of Forms EC40H (1) – PWD Voter Information and Statistics; and
(vi) Applying indelible ink to the cuticle of the finger of the voter (where available).
By the said process of accreditation, the voter was to present himself to the Agent of the 1st Respondent who was to request the PVC of the voter. Where the voter had none, he was not to be allowed to vote; but if the voter had presented the said PVC, the Agent of the 1st Respondent was to proceed as follows:
(i) Call up the voter’s data on the BVAS by reading the bar code on the back of the PVC or reading the QR code against the name of the voter in the Register of Voters or entering the last six digits of the Voter Identification Number (VIN) of the voter into the BVAS or searching the BVAS with the surname of the voter;
(ii) On appearance of the voters’ data on the BVAS, the APO l was to ascertain that the photograph on the PVC was that of the voter and that the Polling Unit details correspond with those of the Polling Unit;
(jii) Request the voter to place his/her thumb or any other finger (where possible) in the place provided on the BVAS for authentication or, if this failed, match the face of the voter to the picture in the BYAS using the device’s facial recognition facility; and
(jv) If the fingerprint or face of the voter matched, request the voter to proceed to APO II.
After complying with the procedure above, the verified voter was to be further scrutinized before proceeding to the process of actual voting. Where the BVAS for the polling unit failed to identify the intending voter, that voter was not be allowed to vote.
(a) In order to ensure that voting did not proceed except as specifically prescribed with the use of the BVAS, in the event of any malfunctioning of the BVAS for a polling unit, the INEC Agent was to:
(i) Immediately inform the LGA and RA supervisors, the Supervisory Presiding Officer (SPO), the Electoral Officer (EO), and the Election monitoring and Support Centre (EMSC) for rcplacc111cnl:
(ii) Suspend Accreditation and Voting until a new BVAS was made:
(iii) file a report of the incident to the designated Official; and
(iv) Inform the voters and polling agents of the situation.
(b) Where a replacement BYAS was not available by 2:30pm, the Presiding Officer was to:
(i) Inform the LGA and RA Supervisors, SPO, EO, and EMSC of the situation.
(ii) File a report of the incident; and
(iii) Inform the voters and polling agents that accreditation and voting for the affected Polling Unit was to continue the following day.
(c) Where a BVAS was replaced in the middle of an election, the data of verified voters in the faulty BYAS was to be merged with data in the replacement B VAS for purposes of determining the number of verified voters.
After clue accreditation and casting of votes by the duly accredited voters, the Presiding Officer was to count the votes at the Polling Unit and enter the votes scored by each candidate in the Form prescribed by the 1st Respondent known as Form ECSA, which Form was then to be signed and stamped by the Presiding Officer and counter signed by the candidates or their Polling Agents where available at the Polling Unit.
The Presiding Officer was then to deliver copies of the result sheet to the party agents who desired to collect such copies as well as the Police Officer where available. Thereafter, the Polling Unit results for all the Polling Units within a Registration Area were to be delivered to the Registration Area Collation Officer who was to collate the results in the Form provided by the 1st Respondent. This process was to be repeated at all stages of collation, whereby the Ward Results were to be delivered to and collated by the Local Government Collation Officer, who was under duty to accelerate same to the final Constituency Collation Officer.
The Petitioners aver that, apart from the importance of the BYAS in the capture of accreditation at a polling unit in an election, the BV AS is also mandatorily to be used in the process of uploading the information or data imputed into it by the 1st Respondents’ Presiding Officer at each Polling Unit, who shall, upon completion of voting and due recording and announcement of the result:
(i) Electronically transmit or transfer the result of the Polling Unit directly to the collation system as prescribed by INEC;
(ii) Use the BVAS to upload a scanned copy of the Form ECSA to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (iRev), as prescribed by the I s1 Respondent; and
(iii) Take the BYAS and the original copy of each of the forms in tamper-evident envelope to the Registration Area/Ward Collation Officer, in the company of Security Agents. The Polling Agents may accompany the Presiding Officer to the Registration Area/Ward Collation Centre.
Amazon Server
Obi told the court that as part of the technological architecture for the conduct of the 2023 General Elections, including the Presidential election, INEC utilized virtual servers on Amazon Web Services (AWS) for the hosting/storage of INEC’s data, particularly results obtained and or generated from the 2023 General Elections, including the election results of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 on the Amazon Cloud Platform. The Petitioners may subpoena the relevant staff or officer of Amazon to establish this, and related facts pleaded in this Petition.
The Amazon Cloud Platform is the world’s most comprehensive and broadly adopted platform which enables users such as large enterprises and government agencies like the 1si Respondent to effectively and in real time manage data, to lower costs, become more agile and effective. The Petitioners hereby plead relevant pages on the website of Amazon which can be accessed at https://aws.amazon.com.
The INEC data captured and or generated during the 2023 Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023, and stored on the AWS data warehouse using cloud computing technology is accessible.
In addition to the above, the result of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 displayed/stored on INEC’s Result Viewing Portal (iRcv) ought to be the same in all material particulars with the result of the election stored in the Virtual Servers on the AWS or the Amazon Cloud Platform.
Transmission of Results
INEC created various levels of collation at the Registration Areas, Local Government Areas, State Constituencies and the Federal Constituency; and by that process, the results of any election, including the one hereby challenged, were only to be accepted for collation if the Collation Officer ascertained that the number of accredited voters corresponded with the number captured in the BVAS and where votes for the parties corresponded with the result electronically transmitted directly from the Polling Units.
In the case of a dispute, the results electronically transmitted or transferred directly from the lower levels and announced were to be used to determine the results at that level of the Collation process. Where no result was directly transmitted in respect of a Polling Unit or a level of collation, it would not be possible to resolve that dispute. In this case, the Labour Partys’ agents and agents of other political parties walked away in protest from the National Collation Centre when the Collation Officer blatantly refused to resolve their disputations of the results being collated as mandatorily stipulated by the Electoral Act, 2022. The Petitioners hereby plead a video clip of the incident as reported by some media houses.
Copies of the Forms EC8A scanned and uploaded through the BVAS to INEC’s Result Viewing Portal (iRev) as mandated by the INEC, were to exactly reflect all other results which originated from the Polling Units. Those which were instantaneously uploaded at the earliest moment ought to be the standard for assessing other results subsequently advanced by the 1st Respondent in the process of Collation leading to the final segment which was the declaration of the result of the election.

https://universalreportersng.com/how-inec-rigged-the-2023-presidential-election-for-tinubu-peter-obi/

The stolen mandate will be returned, that is a fact. You can take this info to the bank.

Story

You just copied and pasted the pages in Peter Obi's election petition.

Obi to the world
God no-go shame us

Mek Tinubu no stain that certificate with ewedu soup o because he is going to return it. Nigerians are tired of old, sick and clueless leaders

It is good that he did it because there are some idiots who are persistent in peddling the ignorant position that Obi did not challenge the rigging of the election and only focused on Tinubu's and Shettima's eligibility based on the drug dealing and double nomination components of his (Obi's) petition.

obi4eze:
You just copied and pasted the pages in Peter Obi's election petition.

All Peter obi votes in the south east should be scrutinized first. Let us see if the INEC officials in those areas followed all these protocols. Even in Lagos labour party rigged. Anyways he will not win in court am 100% sure. 2003 Buhari won the election against obasanjo but court did not upturn the victory same in 2007 . In 2019 Atiku obviously won but Buhari remained president and court did nothing. Same senairo will playout. The CJN most likely will never anul a presidential election. But whichever way the pendolium swings southwest is ready. Regional gov or peaceful separation. We are equally tired!

Afamsi:
Mek Tinubu no stain that certificate with ewedu soup because he is going to return it. Nigerians are tired of old, sick and clueless leaders

Biafra which is an impossibility, will be achieved before Peter Obi smell Aso Rock’s living room.

skj1377:
All Peter obi votes in the south east should be scrutinized first. Let us see if the INEC officials in those areas followed all these protocols. Even in Lagos labour party rigged. Anyways he will not win in court am 100% sure. 2003 Buhari won the election against obasanjo but court did not upturn the victory same in 2007 . In 2019 Atiku obviously won but Buhari remained president and court did nothing. Same senairo will playout. The CJN most likely will never anul a presidential election. But whichever way the pendolium swings southwest is ready. Regional gov or peaceful separation. We are equally tired!

He can never win in court, a person with a name like Peter Gringory Obi, can never be President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Orji Kalu, or even about to be convicted Ekweremadu stands a better chance.

Tinubu is moving around with a stolen mandate

Ofunaofu:
Tinubu is moving around with a stolen mandate

You need the Inspector General of Police direct phone line or The Director General of the State Security Service, Mr. Yusuf Magaji Bichi? .

Ofunaofu:
Tinubu is moving around with a stolen mandate

No be Justin Timberlake sing the smash hit “Cry Me A River”?

Frizz001:
It is good that he did it because there are some idiots who are persistent in peddling the ignorant position that Obi did not challenge the rigging of the election and only focused on Tinubu's and Shettima's eligibility based on the drug dealing and double nomination components of his (Obi's) petition.

Very true though. And Nigerians find it hard to read too.

netricoin:
Amazon has the legal right to allow Peter obi LP to get Inec data from their Amazon clowd because Inec refused to obey court order to allow Peter obi LP get access to the BVAS data

[color=#006600][/color]
In a petition filed Tuesday at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), Mr Obi told the court that the election of Tinubu was invalid by reason of corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 by INEC.
He stated that due to the manifest non-compliance by INEC with the Electoral Act and specific requirements of the Regulations for the conduct of the Presidential election, by the INEC failing, refusing, and neglecting to instantly transmit and upload the result of that election electronically to the iRev from the BVAS, INEC violated the integrity and safety measures entrenched for the conduct of the said election.
Fidelity Leaderboard
Obi further stated that due to INEC’s refusal and neglect to upload and transmit the result of the election in the polling units to the IReV as required by law on the day of the election, INEC suppressed the actual scores obtained by the Labour Party.
Peter Obi told the court that he has in his possession a Spread Sheet containing the Polling Units Codes and details of the aforesaid Eighteen Thousand and Eighty-Eight Polling Units, as well as the authentic results in the aforesaid Eighteen Thousand and Eighty­ Eight Polling Units.
He added that in Benue State, INEC “mischievously uploaded blurred Forms EC8A allegedly for Polling Units to suppress the lawful result of the election in the Polling Units. The Petitioners shall also at trial rely on a Forensic Report of the Presidential Election held in Polling Units in Benue State.”
In Rivers State during the collation exercise at the Federal level, INEC announced the scores of the Labour Party as 175,071 votes and the APC as having 231,591 votes. However, by the actual scores obtained at the polling units, Labour Party’s lawful votes in Rivers State are 205,110 votes, while APCs’ score ought to be 84,108 votes.
Obi further contend that if INEC had, as it was mandated to do, utilised the scores recorded on the Forms EC8A as against the fictitious Forms uploaded on the IReV, the Petitioners Obi would have won Rivers State.
Similarly, in Benne State, INEC whilst suppressing the lawful votes obtained by the Labour Party, announced that Labour Party scores from the polling units in Benue State is 308,372 votes. APC’s score was falsely announced as being 310,468 votes. However, the actual scores of Labour Party from the polling units in Benne State was 329,003 votes, while APC scores were 300,421 votes.
‘By the unlawful announcement made by INEC, they denied me being the winner of the election in Benue State’, Obi told the court. He told the court has obtained “forensic analysis of the election for Rivers State and Benue State made pursuant to the inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.”
Whilst purportedly acting under the cover of uploading the result of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 on the iRev, INEC “embarked and are still embarking on massive misrepresentation and manipulation by uploading fictitious results in Polling Units where there were no elections as well as uploading incorrect results. The actual scores of the Petitioners have been reduced, tampered with, and falsely represented in the false election results uploaded in the iRev.”
Obi said he has Forensic Report of the election result showing his actual scores obtained from the Polling Units and from the result of the election pursuant to the Inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.
scores were 300,421 votes.
‘By the unlawful announcement made by INEC, they denied me being the winner of the election in Benue State’, Obi told the court. He told the court has obtained “forensic analysis of the election for Rivers State and Benue State made pursuant to the inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.”
Whilst purportedly acting under the cover of uploading the result of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 on the iRev, INEC “embarked and are still embarking on massive misrepresentation and manipulation by uploading fictitious results in Polling Units where there were no elections as well as uploading incorrect results. The actual scores of the Petitioners have been reduced, tampered with, and falsely represented in the false election results uploaded in the iRev.”
Obi said he has Forensic Report of the election result showing his actual scores obtained from the Polling Units and from the result of the election pursuant to the Inspection of the election materials as ordered by the Court.
The scores obtained by the Labour Party were unlawfully reduced and added by INEC to the scores of the APC. Further, INEC deliberately uploaded blurred result which were in favour of the Labour Party on the iRev in a bid to conceal them.
Obi asked the court to deduct these unlawful scores added to the APC and for those scores which were legitimately obtained by the Labour Party to be credited to the Labour Partys’ scores. When the scores unlawfully added to the APC are deducted, the Labour Party will have the highest number of votes in the election, as shown in the Forensic Report.
“When the results of Polling Units, Wards, Local Governments, States are properly tabulated and calculated as required by the Electoral Act and the Regulations and Guidelines for election, the overall results of the election and the percentages scored by the Political Parties will show that the Labour Party won the Presidential election of 25 February 2023.”
“From the correct Polling Unit result transmitted electronically and supported by the accreditation on the BVAS, the Labour Party won the election”, according to the Inspection Reports as well as Forensic/Expert analysis pursuant to the orders of the Court.
Obi also claimed that votes cast in the Poling Units in Ekiti State, Oyo State, Ondo State, Taraba State, Osun State, Kano State, Rivers State, Borno State, Katsina State, Kwara State, Gombe State, Yobe State and Niger State exceeded the number of voters accredited on the BVAS in those states.
“The computation and declaration of the result of the election, based on the uploaded results, the votes recorded for the APC did not comply with the legitimate process for computation of the result and disfavoured the Petitioners in RIVERS, LAGOS, TARABA, BENUE, ADAMAWA, IMO, BAUCHI, BORNO, KADUNA, PLATEAU and OTHER STATES OF THE FEDERATION.
In declaring the result of the election, INEC violated its own Regulations when it announced the result of the elections despite the fact that at the time of the said announcement or declaration, the totality of the Polling Unit results was yet to be fully scanned, uploaded and transmitted electronically as required by the Electoral Act, Obi said.
“The results and details recorded in the Forms EC8A. ECSB. EC8C. ECSD and ECSE which formed the basis of the declared result were not the product of compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s Regulations mandating the process of accreditation, voting, counting, recording of votes, and uploading to the INEC’s iRev Portal and the backend virtual server installed to ensure a uniform process.
Obi and the Labour Party further contend that when the purported scores recorded in the polling units where the above instances of over­ voting occurred are deducted from the alleged votes obtained by Bola Tinubu and on which INEC based the hurried declaration of Tinubu as the winner of the election, the margin of the purported lead between the APC and the Labour Party will be far less than the number of voters who ought to legitimately vote in those polling units.
Mr Obi stated that instances of over-voting in the conduct of the Presidential election held on 25th February 2023 occurred in more places than stated on the Form EC40G(iii), according to the Report of the BYAS Accreditation in the polling units.
The above instances of non-compliance substantially affected the outcome of the election, in that if these instances did not occur in the conduct of the Presidential election, the labour Party would have emerged the winners of the said election. Obi said.
Below are the Regulations for the conduct of the Presidential election which Obi claimed were violated by INEC
By the Regulations, voting was to be in accordance with the Continuous Accreditation and Voting System (CAVS) and no person was to be allowed to vote at any Polling Unit other than the one at which his or her name was disclosed on the Register of Voters. The intending voter was then to present the Permanent Voters Card (PVC) to INEC’s staff who was to verify. same using BVAS.
(i) Checking the Permanent Voter’s Card (PVC) of the voter;
(ii) Positive identification of the voter in the BVAS;
(iii) Authentication of the voter by matching his/her fingerprints or face (facial recognition) using the BVAS;
(iv) Positive identification of the voter in the Register of voters;
(v) Completion of Forms EC40H (1) – PWD Voter Information and Statistics; and
(vi) Applying indelible ink to the cuticle of the finger of the voter (where available).
By the said process of accreditation, the voter was to present himself to the Agent of the 1st Respondent who was to request the PVC of the voter. Where the voter had none, he was not to be allowed to vote; but if the voter had presented the said PVC, the Agent of the 1st Respondent was to proceed as follows:
(i) Call up the voter’s data on the BVAS by reading the bar code on the back of the PVC or reading the QR code against the name of the voter in the Register of Voters or entering the last six digits of the Voter Identification Number (VIN) of the voter into the BVAS or searching the BVAS with the surname of the voter;
(ii) On appearance of the voters’ data on the BVAS, the APO l was to ascertain that the photograph on the PVC was that of the voter and that the Polling Unit details correspond with those of the Polling Unit;
(jii) Request the voter to place his/her thumb or any other finger (where possible) in the place provided on the BVAS for authentication or, if this failed, match the face of the voter to the picture in the BYAS using the device’s facial recognition facility; and
(jv) If the fingerprint or face of the voter matched, request the voter to proceed to APO II.
After complying with the procedure above, the verified voter was to be further scrutinized before proceeding to the process of actual voting. Where the BVAS for the polling unit failed to identify the intending voter, that voter was not be allowed to vote.
(a) In order to ensure that voting did not proceed except as specifically prescribed with the use of the BVAS, in the event of any malfunctioning of the BVAS for a polling unit, the INEC Agent was to:
(i) Immediately inform the LGA and RA supervisors, the Supervisory Presiding Officer (SPO), the Electoral Officer (EO), and the Election monitoring and Support Centre (EMSC) for rcplacc111cnl:
(ii) Suspend Accreditation and Voting until a new BVAS was made:
(iii) file a report of the incident to the designated Official; and
(iv) Inform the voters and polling agents of the situation.
(b) Where a replacement BYAS was not available by 2:30pm, the Presiding Officer was to:
(i) Inform the LGA and RA Supervisors, SPO, EO, and EMSC of the situation.
(ii) File a report of the incident; and
(iii) Inform the voters and polling agents that accreditation and voting for the affected Polling Unit was to continue the following day.
(c) Where a BVAS was replaced in the middle of an election, the data of verified voters in the faulty BYAS was to be merged with data in the replacement B VAS for purposes of determining the number of verified voters.
After clue accreditation and casting of votes by the duly accredited voters, the Presiding Officer was to count the votes at the Polling Unit and enter the votes scored by each candidate in the Form prescribed by the 1st Respondent known as Form ECSA, which Form was then to be signed and stamped by the Presiding Officer and counter signed by the candidates or their Polling Agents where available at the Polling Unit.
The Presiding Officer was then to deliver copies of the result sheet to the party agents who desired to collect such copies as well as the Police Officer where available. Thereafter, the Polling Unit results for all the Polling Units within a Registration Area were to be delivered to the Registration Area Collation Officer who was to collate the results in the Form provided by the 1st Respondent. This process was to be repeated at all stages of collation, whereby the Ward Results were to be delivered to and collated by the Local Government Collation Officer, who was under duty to accelerate same to the final Constituency Collation Officer.
The Petitioners aver that, apart from the importance of the BYAS in the capture of accreditation at a polling unit in an election, the BV AS is also mandatorily to be used in the process of uploading the information or data imputed into it by the 1st Respondents’ Presiding Officer at each Polling Unit, who shall, upon completion of voting and due recording and announcement of the result:
(i) Electronically transmit or transfer the result of the Polling Unit directly to the collation system as prescribed by INEC;
(ii) Use the BVAS to upload a scanned copy of the Form ECSA to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (iRev), as prescribed by the I s1 Respondent; and
(iii) Take the BYAS and the original copy of each of the forms in tamper-evident envelope to the Registration Area/Ward Collation Officer, in the company of Security Agents. The Polling Agents may accompany the Presiding Officer to the Registration Area/Ward Collation Centre.
Amazon Server
Obi told the court that as part of the technological architecture for the conduct of the 2023 General Elections, including the Presidential election, INEC utilized virtual servers on Amazon Web Services (AWS) for the hosting/storage of INEC’s data, particularly results obtained and or generated from the 2023 General Elections, including the election results of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 on the Amazon Cloud Platform. The Petitioners may subpoena the relevant staff or officer of Amazon to establish this, and related facts pleaded in this Petition.
The Amazon Cloud Platform is the world’s most comprehensive and broadly adopted platform which enables users such as large enterprises and government agencies like the 1si Respondent to effectively and in real time manage data, to lower costs, become more agile and effective. The Petitioners hereby plead relevant pages on the website of Amazon which can be accessed at https://aws.amazon.com.
The INEC data captured and or generated during the 2023 Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023, and stored on the AWS data warehouse using cloud computing technology is accessible.
In addition to the above, the result of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023 displayed/stored on INEC’s Result Viewing Portal (iRcv) ought to be the same in all material particulars with the result of the election stored in the Virtual Servers on the AWS or the Amazon Cloud Platform.
Transmission of Results
INEC created various levels of collation at the Registration Areas, Local Government Areas, State Constituencies and the Federal Constituency; and by that process, the results of any election, including the one hereby challenged, were only to be accepted for collation if the Collation Officer ascertained that the number of accredited voters corresponded with the number captured in the BVAS and where votes for the parties corresponded with the result electronically transmitted directly from the Polling Units.
In the case of a dispute, the results electronically transmitted or transferred directly from the lower levels and announced were to be used to determine the results at that level of the Collation process. Where no result was directly transmitted in respect of a Polling Unit or a level of collation, it would not be possible to resolve that dispute. In this case, the Labour Partys’ agents and agents of other political parties walked away in protest from the National Collation Centre when the Collation Officer blatantly refused to resolve their disputations of the results being collated as mandatorily stipulated by the Electoral Act, 2022. The Petitioners hereby plead a video clip of the incident as reported by some media houses.
Copies of the Forms EC8A scanned and uploaded through the BVAS to INEC’s Result Viewing Portal (iRev) as mandated by the INEC, were to exactly reflect all other results which originated from the Polling Units. Those which were instantaneously uploaded at the earliest moment ought to be the standard for assessing other results subsequently advanced by the 1st Respondent in the process of Collation leading to the final segment which was the declaration of the result of the election.

https://universalreportersng.com/how-inec-rigged-the-2023-presidential-election-for-tinubu-peter-obi/

Preseident elect Peter Obi

Frizz001:
It is good that he did it because there are some idiots who are persistent in peddling the ignorant position that Obi did not challenge the rigging of the election and only focused on Tinubu's and Shettima's eligibility based on the drug dealing and double nomination components of his (Obi's) petition.

Chasing Labor parry shadows, Peter Obi has shown Himself to be, & is a weak politician, Empty Barrel.

IVORY2009:




Preseident elect Peter Obi

Na shame they make the man they run from pillar to post, who will make a person like that idiot President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?

Even President of The Republic of Biafra he cannot win, let alone Nigeria.

skj1377:
All Peter obi votes in the south east should be scrutinized first. Let us see if the INEC officials in those areas followed all these protocols. Even in Lagos labour party rigged. Anyways he will not win in court am 100% sure. 2003 Buhari won the election against obasanjo but court did not upturn the victory same in 2007 . In 2019 Atiku obviously won but Buhari remained president and court did nothing. Same senairo will playout. The CJN most likely will never anul a presidential election. But whichever way the pendolium swings southwest is ready. Regional gov or peaceful separation. We are equally tired!

By winning only few state in the North .Without winning any state in the south (2003 and 2007) No one wins like that

@Netrcoin, try and make the post more concise for easier readability.

Dude came prepared! He adhered to the maxim that when dining with the devil, come with a very long spoon!

favor914:
Na shame they make the man they run from pillar to post, who will make a person like that idiot President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?

Even President of The Republic of Biafra he cannot win, let alone Nigeria.

Who would vote a sick president like Tinubu to rule over them on a normal day.... if not rigging

obi4eze:


Very true though. And Nigerians find it hard to read too.

True dat @bolded! Even on here, post anything more than two paragraphs and you'll hear moans that you're now posting epistle!

Lazy fcks!

Noted.

Ode

loosecanon50:
The stolen mandate will be returned, that is a fact. You can take this info to the bank.

Rest

Ofemmanu1:
Story

so it looks like story to you? Ok ooo

skj1377:
All Peter obi votes in the south east should be scrutinized first. Let us see if the INEC officials in those areas followed all these protocols. Even in Lagos labour party rigged. Anyways he will not win in court am 100% sure. 2003 Buhari won the election against obasanjo but court did not upturn the victory same in 2007 . In 2019 Atiku obviously won but Buhari remained president and court did nothing. Same senairo will playout. The CJN most likely will never anul a presidential election. But whichever way the pendolium swings southwest is ready. Regional gov or peaceful separation. We are equally tired!

Excellent writeup.

skj1377:
All Peter obi votes in the south east should be scrutinized first. Let us see if the INEC officials in those areas followed all these protocols. Even in Lagos labour party rigged. Anyways he will not win in court am 100% sure. 2003 Buhari won the election against obasanjo but court did not upturn the victory same in 2007 . In 2019 Atiku obviously won but Buhari remained president and court did nothing. Same senairo will playout. The CJN most likely will never anul a presidential election. But whichever way the pendolium swings southwest is ready. Regional gov or peaceful separation. We are equally tired!

How did Buhari win Obasanjo? Are you joking or what? OBJ that was seen as the father of democracy? Una sef can talk anyhow.

Jostoman:
so it looks like story to you? Ok ooo

Obi is sitting on a long thing.