| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Babastrong(m): 10:39am On Jan 30, 2023 |
[quote author=EKONGKING post=120492341]If want happens in osun as claimed by APC happens at national in presidential polls ,the country will go up in flames , whoever is the effected party.
[ And when it goes up in flames, you may not live to extinguish it. What are waiting for the rogues who think they are the most rogues on the planet. Ojukwu tried it and paid for it. But we are watching the watchers.] |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by rolams(m): 10:44am On Jan 30, 2023 |
I thought he will bring the proof! |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by ejimatic: 10:45am On Jan 30, 2023 |
adesola89:
You are ignorant of the electoral act provision
Chech section 51 sub section 3 of the 2022 amended electoral act.
. Many people on this thread are not aware of EA 2022. They will be fully awake to the reality that AC and SC appeal grounds on the TB judgement by PDP and Adeleke are just academic exercises , |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by tomju2(f): 10:48am On Jan 30, 2023 |
You cannot ignore the BVAS machine and then soley rely on server. The primary source of information to the server is from the BVAS. The appellate Court will do the needful. 1 Like 1 Share |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by BlueDuck: 10:59am On Jan 30, 2023 |
Johnnyessence:
Oyetola will lose both in Appeal court and Supreme Court of justice
Few points on this judgement:
1. The first report given to APC actually showed over-voting in more than 700 polling units. It is actually around 1500 polling units or thereabout including units APC won. Therefore, the alleged over-voting is widespread although APC based their petition on units they lost (700). This was alluded to in the minority judgement. Therefore, it is not restricted to where PDP won.
2. The second report given to PDP was better but was also showing over-voting in some units as well. The majority ruling of the tribunal claimed that INEC colluded with PDP in the pendency of the petition by APC to produce the second reports. However, this argument is puerile at best by two reasons (a) PDP is entitled to ask for the same forms/reports given to APC to defend the petition and can only ask for it in the pendency of the petition. Why would the winner of election ask for BVAS report? PDP won the election. They asked for the report after studying the petition of APC.
(b) The second BVAS report cannot be said to be tampered with because it still showed over-voting as claimed by APC although in less polling units across the state.
3. The two reports are contradictory leaving the PDP to then ask for physical inspection of the BVAS machines. At least the reports are generated by BVAS machines. The BVAS machines were brought to the open court and inspected and the data there correspond with the election results. Now, there were three evidences. 2 BVAS reports (printed from server, mind you) and one physical reports of the BVAS machines in the open court. In fact the two BVAS reports are not in tandem with the results of the physical inspection of the BVAS machines. The majority ruling decided to go with first BVAS report, neglecting 2nd BVAS validly given to PDP and the data on the BVAS itself.
4. In the majority judgement, the judge harped heavily and compared the veracity of the two BVAS reports. He said the 2nd BVAS report is doctored. Okay, but what of the BVAS machines itself? Is it also doctored? The tribunal gave permission to inspect the machines by the two parties and everyone in court saw there was no over-voting in BVAS machines but the tribunal didn't even take a position on the results of BVAS inspection in their ruling.
5. The tribunal didn't dabble into whether the results of BVAS machines inspection are accurate or tampered with as well. The question is, are BVAS machines tampered with as well? I will answer in negative by two reasons:
(a) we learned that only the chairman of INEC and director of ICT can have access to data stored on the BVAS machines. Even one of them cannot access the machines data without the cooperation of other. We all know that immediately after election and after tribunal started sitting, the BVAS machines were housed in the tribunal and not with INEC in Osogbo.
(b) The second reason why I believe that the machines were not tampered with was because the inspection of the machines showed over-voting in 6 units. If INEC had tampered with it, no polling units will report over-voting.
5. There were 3 members of the tribunal. The chairman wrote the leading judgment and other member wrote minority judgement. The third member of the panel did not agree with either the majority or minority judgements in the open court. After reading of the judgment by the chairman, the third member only greeted people and say goodbye. No concurrence or otherwise. I dare to say there is no judgement of that tribunal.
In conclusion, I believe the fight is actually against BVAS machines to erode the confidence of people on the machines or INEC and bring apathy in the forthcoming general election. Everybody should endeavour to get their PVC and vote wisely. Your vote will count. Concise analysis. It would seem that both INEC and the tribunal have been financially induced by the APC though...else why would the tribunal do such a shoddy job, and why would the INEC start contradicting themselves by producing two mismatched BVAS reports (neither of which matches the BVAS figures itself, thus leaving us with three sets of figures). Is it so difficult to pull figures from BVAS machine and put it on paper?! Even a pre-teen would be able to do that with proper supervision. |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Kunite2023: 10:59am On Jan 30, 2023 |
Is good to read a different version of what the entire process considered before giving judgment. I can now understand that it is not yet Uhuru for APC and their supporters. The journey has just begun. Let their be fair judgment at the end from the upper chambers. Johnnyessence:
*HIGHLIGHTING THE ERRORS IN THE OSUN TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN'S VERDICT BY HASHIM ABIOYE ESQ.*
1. NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE BVAS MACHINES BUT WITH THE INEC SERVER AS AGAINST THE ERRONEOUS HOLDING OF THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN.
2. ACCREDITATION WAS BY BVAS MACHINES CONCURRENTLY WITH THE VOTERS' REGISTERS. BVAS MACHINES, VOTERS REGISTER AND THE FORMS WERE WHAT WERE USED TO CONDUCT AND DECLARE ELECTION RESULTS, NOT THE SERVER WHICH THE APC RELIED UPON AND UPON WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN PREMISED HIS VERDICT.
3. INTRODUCTION OF BVAS HAS NOT REMOVED VOTERS REGISTER AS AGAINST THE HOLDING OF THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN.
4. DIRECT INFORMATION FROM BVAS MACHINES CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH THE INFORMATION FROM THE SERVER WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY NETWORK.
5. OYETOLA'S PETITION WAS DETERMINED UPON THE BVAS REPORT FROM SERVER NOT UPON THE PHYSICAL INFORMATION ON THE BVAS MACHINES WHICH HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE THE DAY AND TIME OF THE ELECTION.
6. BVAS MACHINE IS DIFFERENT FROM SERVER REPORT. BVAS IS THE DIRECT PRIMARY SOURCE, WHILE SERVER IS NOT, AS AGAINST THE VERDICT OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TRIBUNAL.
7. BVAS MACHINES USED FOR OSUN ELECTION WERE IN EVIDENCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE INFORMATION ON THEM TALLIES WITH THE FORMS EC8A, THEREFORE NO DISCREPANCIES AS AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL.
8. SERVER CREATED DISCREPANCIES BY PRODUCING TWO DIFFERENT BVAS REPORTS, BUT THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES PRODUCED ONLY ONE WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN JETTISONED.
9. THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN PICKED THE SERVER REPORT WHICH THE PETITIONERS SERVED AS THE PILLAR OF THEIR CASE, ABANDONED THE LATER SERVER REPORT. THE TRIBUNAL EQUALLY CLOSED ITS EYES AGAINST THE BVAS MACHINES AND THE FORMS EC8As THAT WERE PHYSICALLY BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
10. THE TRIBUNAL WAGED A WAR AGAINST THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES AND THE DIRECT DATA EXTRACTED FROM THEM, WHEN INDEED THE WAR SHOULD BE AGAINST THE CONTROVERSIAL BVAS REPORTS.
11. THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN GRANTED AN ORDER FOR PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF THE BVAS MACHINES, YET CLOSED ITS EYES AGAINST THE REPORT OF THE SAID PHYSICAL INSPECTION INCLUDING THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES.
12. THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES, AND THE REPORT OF PHYSICAL INSPECTION DID NOT ESTABLISH OVER-VOTING AT ALL, BUT THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN WENT ON TO HOLD OVER-VOTING ON THE BASIS OF THE SERVER REPORT.
13. NIGERIANS AND THE WORLD SHOULD KNOW THAT THE DOCUMENT WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN HELD TO BE FORGERY WAS THE SAME DOCUMENT IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE SUPERIOR COURT OF APPEAL HAS VINDICATED ADELEKE, SINCE THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT HE ATTENDED EDE MUSLIM GRAMMAR SCHOOL AND SAT FOR WAEC. THE TRIBUNAL FAILED TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE SAID JUDGMENT WHICH CLEARED ADELEKE OF FORGERY.
14. NO NECO RESULT WAS CONTAINED IN ALL THE DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS FALSELY BEING PEDDLED BY THE APC AND THEIR PROPAGANDISTS.
15. THE WHOLE WORLD SHOULD RISE TO DEFEND THE BVAS MACHINES AS AGAINST THE CONTROVERSIAL SERVER REPORTS UPON WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN BASED HIS JUDGMENT.
16. THE APC PROPAGANDISTS AND MERCINARIES ARE HOLDING ON TO BIG LIES, A BASELESS REPORT TO TOPPLE A VALIDLY ELECTED GOVERNOR.
17. THE WORLD SHOULD BE TOLD THAT BVAS MACHINES USED FOR OSUN 2022 GOVERNORSHIP ELECTION HAD NO PROBLEM, NO OVER-VOTING, BUT A SERVER REPORT WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN ERRONEOUSLY RELIED UPON.
18. THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN LACKED JURISDICTION BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 51(1),(2),(3) & (4) OF THE ELECTORAL ACT, 2022, TO DECLARE OYETOLA THE WINNER AFTER CANCELLING VOTES OF THE PARTIES ON THE BASIS OF THE SERVER REPORT, EVEN THOUGH THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES AND THE FORMS EC8As TENDERED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT ESTABLISH SUCH.
- Compiled by Hashim Abioye Esq.
https://www.facebook.com/100028527937018/posts/pfbid02MqVzVaWGp2TAvYJdz2dhGKiLGL8JiwuZ81Lkn5a59wfHxBarqy5RajkH4MVye8DYl/?app=fbl |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Taiggarr: 11:05am On Jan 30, 2023 |
EKONGKING:
So said a moronic idiot who cannot travel on any roads with out being kidnapped and Butchered like a goat.
I am on the road to Kaduna from Abuja as I speak..been doing this every 3 weeks for the last 5 months.. USELESS UNTHINKING sentimental jobless KIDULT! |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by EKONGKING: 11:10am On Jan 30, 2023 |
Taiggarr:
I am on the road to Kaduna from ;DAbuja as I speak..been doing this every 3 weeks for the last 5 months..
USELESS UNTHINKING sentimental jobless KIDULT! Happy travels kid , a kid registered in 2022 is giving lectures to adult registered in 2010 . Continue.  1 Like |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by PointZerom: 11:13am On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Softmirror: 11:16am On Jan 30, 2023 |
Johnnyessence:
😂 na you be justice that will sit on the Appeal court of justice and Supreme Court of justice panel . Odi Aye Atunwa fun ijoba Oyetola ni ipinle Osun. Tinubu ma lule piii Lekan siii niiii. February 25th presidential poll is here . Protest votes on February 25th presidential poll YOU HAVE BEEN WASTING YOUR TIME ALL OVER NAIRALAND WITH A CASE SO CRYSTAL CLEAR.
ADELEKE TI LULE!!! NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT. ANYTHING ELSE IS JUST NOISE AND WASTE OF TIME. |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by hush15: 11:17am On Jan 30, 2023 |
EcoBrick:
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/01/osun-how-bvas-exposed-pdps-rigging-machine/ When going to the polls, people don't go wearing party emblems to vote. It's called secret ballot for a reason. Who knows whether that was strategy in APC to cause over voting afterall, this over voting was in their stronghold. As their impending defeat became eminent in the osun elections, they resulted over voting to either call for an annulment or even luckier go thru the tribunal. Whether justice prevails, the election should have just be left alone as a lesson left for the electoral body since INEC was the fault here not the contestant just as we know in a football match where referee is held accountable for anomalies and the winners are not affected whoever wins. Lessons here is nobody should undermine Tinubu and APC in their criminal tendencies. There is no limit to the evil antics to swing things in their favor, no matter the cost. All Nigerians should come out, vote their hearts out, protect that vote like their life depends on it and ensure this evil called APC never see the light again in whatever form. |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Agbegbaorogboye: 11:25am On Jan 30, 2023 |
Johnnyessence:
Oyetola will lose both in Appeal court and Supreme Court of justice
Few points on this judgement:
1. The first report given to APC actually showed over-voting in more than 700 polling units. It is actually around 1500 polling units or thereabout including units APC won. Therefore, the alleged over-voting is widespread although APC based their petition on units they lost (700). This was alluded to in the minority judgement. Therefore, it is not restricted to where PDP won.
2. The second report given to PDP was better but was also showing over-voting in some units as well. The majority ruling of the tribunal claimed that INEC colluded with PDP in the pendency of the petition by APC to produce the second reports. However, this argument is puerile at best by two reasons (a) PDP is entitled to ask for the same forms/reports given to APC to defend the petition and can only ask for it in the pendency of the petition. Why would the winner of election ask for BVAS report? PDP won the election. They asked for the report after studying the petition of APC.
(b) The second BVAS report cannot be said to be tampered with because it still showed over-voting as claimed by APC although in less polling units across the state.
3. The two reports are contradictory leaving the PDP to then ask for physical inspection of the BVAS machines. At least the reports are generated by BVAS machines. The BVAS machines were brought to the open court and inspected and the data there correspond with the election results. Now, there were three evidences. 2 BVAS reports (printed from server, mind you) and one physical reports of the BVAS machines in the open court. In fact the two BVAS reports are not in tandem with the results of the physical inspection of the BVAS machines. The majority ruling decided to go with first BVAS report, neglecting 2nd BVAS validly given to PDP and the data on the BVAS itself.
4. In the majority judgement, the judge harped heavily and compared the veracity of the two BVAS reports. He said the 2nd BVAS report is doctored. Okay, but what of the BVAS machines itself? Is it also doctored? The tribunal gave permission to inspect the machines by the two parties and everyone in court saw there was no over-voting in BVAS machines but the tribunal didn't even take a position on the results of BVAS inspection in their ruling.
5. The tribunal didn't dabble into whether the results of BVAS machines inspection are accurate or tampered with as well. The question is, are BVAS machines tampered with as well? I will answer in negative by two reasons:
(a) we learned that only the chairman of INEC and director of ICT can have access to data stored on the BVAS machines. Even one of them cannot access the machines data without the cooperation of other. We all know that immediately after election and after tribunal started sitting, the BVAS machines were housed in the tribunal and not with INEC in Osogbo.
(b) The second reason why I believe that the machines were not tampered with was because the inspection of the machines showed over-voting in 6 units. If INEC had tampered with it, no polling units will report over-voting.
5. There were 3 members of the tribunal. The chairman wrote the leading judgment and other member wrote minority judgement. The third member of the panel did not agree with either the majority or minority judgements in the open court. After reading of the judgment by the chairman, the third member only greeted people and say goodbye. No concurrence or otherwise. I dare to say there is no judgement of that tribunal.
In conclusion, I believe the fight is actually against BVAS machines to erode the confidence of people on the machines or INEC and bring apathy in the forthcoming general election. Everybody should endeavour to get their PVC and vote wisely. Your vote will count. That your number one. Did the PDP team not draw the attention of the tribunal to the actual number of polling units where over voting took place in that report? If no, then PDP need to get a more serious legal team then they have now. |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by adioolayi(m): 11:27am On Jan 30, 2023 |
PointZerom:
Just go to the strong hold of your opponent and do over voting. The whole polling unit will be cancelled.
After accreditation, I wonder how INEC and party representatives didn't know how many people were acreditated. This assertions is not logical in Nigeria's elections that's if you have been voting. It's not possible to go to your opposition strongholds and do overvoting...there will be violence because, that will be resisted. It's called "strongholds" for a reason. Once there is violence, elections will be cancelled and will be conducted another time with more security. Overvoting are only done by those that owns the strongholds..not opposition |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Omodua(m): 11:29am On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Validated: 11:31am On Jan 30, 2023 |
post=120492491:
GOD BLESS NIGERIA.
Mr Daniel.
Here you have it.....
The BVAS is truly a game changer and should ordinarily be above manipulation.
2) The BVAS ascertains or validates voters' identity, and it is mandatory prior to voting. Every voter must be BVAS'ed before they are issued with a ballot to vote. In short, BVAS accredits voters.
3) After elections, the results are then collated and entered manually on INEC form EC8As. However, the number of voters on INEC Form EC8A must never exceed the number of accredited voters on BVAS. That's over-voting and automatic cancellation under the EA 2022.
4) When a winner was declared by INEC in Osun elections, it was assumed by all that the BVAS and Form EC8As tallied. It was thought that Adeleke won and Oyetola lost.
5) APC applied for the BVAS report and Form EC8AS to file their petition days after the winner was declared.
6) APC in preparing their Petition found discrepancies between BVAS report and FORM EC8As in over 700 polling units. The votes recorded on Form EC8As literally exceeded were BVAS accredited. There were over-voting by people who must have literally bypassed the BVAS either for not having PVC or other dubious reasons.
7) Once INEC, PDP, and the Governor were served with the APC Petition, they all filed their responses and added another entirely different BVAS report, which INEC now called a "SYNCHRONISED BVAS Report.". So, there were two BVAS reports before the Tribunal. The one issued to APC before they filled their petition and the one issued to PDP during the pendency of the petition.
8.) At the Tribunal, each party strove to prove which BVAS was credible and which was not.
You now be the judge. Which of the two conflicting BVAS does your conscience say is credible? The first one that was used to declare a winner on the elections day or the other "SYNCHRONISED BVAS" that issued almost 30 days after a winner was already declared and during the pendency of a suit?
What does your conscience say?
I think INEC National should be grateful to APC/Oyetola/Osun for helping them expose the manipulation that dubious politicians can subject the BVAS to. Plus, voters must now know that bypassing theBVAS is not helpful.
Everyone must be accredited by the BVAS to be eligible to vote.
Read and forward to ya neighbors, village people and every other soul interested in Osun state elections.
Cc:LegendHero.
We Rise. At Supreme Court, Adeleke will triumph. Only a presiding officer can cancel a polling result after all party agents have signed such result. Except where a party agent decides to abstain, then that result is invalid. |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Omodua(m): 11:33am On Jan 30, 2023 |
VillagePipu:
Worthless Nyamuri pig misguided, silly and idiotic village Pipu! |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by NothingDoMe: 11:41am On Jan 30, 2023 |
ejimatic:
. The Tribunal chairman 'no send anybody ' He was frank and precise in his. judicial interpretation of laws and evidences. And he "lo lo lo buga won" to state house 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 1 Like 1 Share |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by tabaralph: 11:44am On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by PointZerom: 11:48am On Jan 30, 2023 |
adioolayi:
This assertions is not logical in Nigeria's elections that's if you have been voting.
It's not possible to go to your opposition strongholds and do overvoting...there will be violence because, that will be resisted. It's called "strongholds" for a reason.
Once there is violence, elections will be cancelled and will be conducted another time with more security.
Overvoting are only done by those that owns the strongholds..not opposition Oppositions does it with INEC staff this is what APC did in Osun. |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by asobo1: 11:54am On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Enemyofpeace: 11:54am On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by merits(m): 11:56am On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by dustmalik(m): 11:56am On Jan 30, 2023 |
Ventura1:
What happened is that APC is smarter than PDP, was it that no over voting in polling units won by APC? absolutely No, but they are the one that file the case.
Why can't PDP counter challenge APC during the hearing on results from PU APC wins? Judges will only hear cases as presented by the petitioner.
The Osun tribunal judgement is an eye opener for all political parties, and INEC. The best appeal court can do is to call for fresh election in those PU. If you look at the figures that were declared by Inec and the figures after deduction by the tribunal, you would notice that both parties had their votes deducted. However, PDP figures were more deducted |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by BJanta: 11:56am On Jan 30, 2023 |
Johnnyessence:
Oyetola will lose both in Appeal court and Supreme Court of justice
Few points on this judgement:
1. The first report given to APC actually showed over-voting in more than 700 polling units. It is actually around 1500 polling units or thereabout including units APC won. Therefore, the alleged over-voting is widespread although APC based their petition on units they lost (700). This was alluded to in the minority judgement. Therefore, it is not restricted to where PDP won.
2. The second report given to PDP was better but was also showing over-voting in some units as well. The majority ruling of the tribunal claimed that INEC colluded with PDP in the pendency of the petition by APC to produce the second reports. However, this argument is puerile at best by two reasons (a) PDP is entitled to ask for the same forms/reports given to APC to defend the petition and can only ask for it in the pendency of the petition. Why would the winner of election ask for BVAS report? PDP won the election. They asked for the report after studying the petition of APC.
(b) The second BVAS report cannot be said to be tampered with because it still showed over-voting as claimed by APC although in less polling units across the state.
3. The two reports are contradictory leaving the PDP to then ask for physical inspection of the BVAS machines. At least the reports are generated by BVAS machines. The BVAS machines were brought to the open court and inspected and the data there correspond with the election results. Now, there were three evidences. 2 BVAS reports (printed from server, mind you) and one physical reports of the BVAS machines in the open court. In fact the two BVAS reports are not in tandem with the results of the physical inspection of the BVAS machines. The majority ruling decided to go with first BVAS report, neglecting 2nd BVAS validly given to PDP and the data on the BVAS itself.
4. In the majority judgement, the judge harped heavily and compared the veracity of the two BVAS reports. He said the 2nd BVAS report is doctored. Okay, but what of the BVAS machines itself? Is it also doctored? The tribunal gave permission to inspect the machines by the two parties and everyone in court saw there was no over-voting in BVAS machines but the tribunal didn't even take a position on the results of BVAS inspection in their ruling.
5. The tribunal didn't dabble into whether the results of BVAS machines inspection are accurate or tampered with as well. The question is, are BVAS machines tampered with as well? I will answer in negative by two reasons:
(a) we learned that only the chairman of INEC and director of ICT can have access to data stored on the BVAS machines. Even one of them cannot access the machines data without the cooperation of other. We all know that immediately after election and after tribunal started sitting, the BVAS machines were housed in the tribunal and not with INEC in Osogbo.
(b) The second reason why I believe that the machines were not tampered with was because the inspection of the machines showed over-voting in 6 units. If INEC had tampered with it, no polling units will report over-voting.
5. There were 3 members of the tribunal. The chairman wrote the leading judgment and other member wrote minority judgement. The third member of the panel did not agree with either the majority or minority judgements in the open court. After reading of the judgment by the chairman, the third member only greeted people and say goodbye. No concurrence or otherwise. I dare to say there is no judgement of that tribunal.
In conclusion, I believe the fight is actually against BVAS machines to erode the confidence of people on the machines or INEC and bring apathy in the forthcoming general election. Everybody should endeavour to get their PVC and vote wisely. Your vote will count. THE BVAS can be doctored at will. I speak to you as an IT expert. Bring to me, I'll doctor it. You can tamper with the micro device algorithm inside it. Anything stored on a computer device is not secure. I myself can cheaply do it once I access the source code. 1 Like |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by alen4smith(m): 12:01pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
Johnnyessence:
Ismail omipidan the clueless press Secretary to Oyetola lies and propaganda are Siamese twins. Awon ole oni ro jati jati squealer of election rigger . |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by alen4smith(m): 12:13pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
JoshTim:
All these stories you write, adeleke was declared winner based on the result given to APC. So, that is what the court is upholding. don't mind johnyessence he is the nuisance of politics section . |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Brendaniel: 12:15pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
post=120492491:
GOD BLESS NIGERIA.
Mr Daniel.
Here you have it.....
The BVAS is truly a game changer and should ordinarily be above manipulation.
2) The BVAS ascertains or validates voters' identity, and it is mandatory prior to voting. Every voter must be BVAS'ed before they are issued with a ballot to vote. In short, BVAS accredits voters.
3) After elections, the results are then collated and entered manually on INEC form EC8As. However, the number of voters on INEC Form EC8A must never exceed the number of accredited voters on BVAS. That's over-voting and automatic cancellation under the EA 2022.
4) When a winner was declared by INEC in Osun elections, it was assumed by all that the BVAS and Form EC8As tallied. It was thought that Adeleke won and Oyetola lost.
5) APC applied for the BVAS report and Form EC8AS to file their petition days after the winner was declared.
6) APC in preparing their Petition found discrepancies between BVAS report and FORM EC8As in over 700 polling units. The votes recorded on Form EC8As literally exceeded were BVAS accredited. There were over-voting by people who must have literally bypassed the BVAS either for not having PVC or other dubious reasons.
7) Once INEC, PDP, and the Governor were served with the APC Petition, they all filed their responses and added another entirely different BVAS report, which INEC now called a "SYNCHRONISED BVAS Report.". So, there were two BVAS reports before the Tribunal. The one issued to APC before they filled their petition and the one issued to PDP during the pendency of the petition.
8.) At the Tribunal, each party strove to prove which BVAS was credible and which was not.
You now be the judge. Which of the two conflicting BVAS does your conscience say is credible? The first one that was used to declare a winner on the elections day or the other "SYNCHRONISED BVAS" that issued almost 30 days after a winner was already declared and during the pendency of a suit?
What does your conscience say?
I think INEC National should be grateful to APC/Oyetola/Osun for helping them expose the manipulation that dubious politicians can subject the BVAS to. Plus, voters must now know that bypassing theBVAS is not helpful.
Everyone must be accredited by the BVAS to be eligible to vote.
Read and forward to ya neighbors, village people and every other soul interested in Osun state elections.
Cc:LegendHero.
We Rise. You guys are enjoying it till it backfires on you guys... |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Johnn44: 12:18pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by pavoda: 12:27pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
This is Apt. Johnnyessence:
*HIGHLIGHTING THE ERRORS IN THE OSUN TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN'S VERDICT BY HASHIM ABIOYE ESQ.*
1. NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE BVAS MACHINES BUT WITH THE INEC SERVER AS AGAINST THE ERRONEOUS HOLDING OF THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN.
2. ACCREDITATION WAS BY BVAS MACHINES CONCURRENTLY WITH THE VOTERS' REGISTERS. BVAS MACHINES, VOTERS REGISTER AND THE FORMS WERE WHAT WERE USED TO CONDUCT AND DECLARE ELECTION RESULTS, NOT THE SERVER WHICH THE APC RELIED UPON AND UPON WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN PREMISED HIS VERDICT.
3. INTRODUCTION OF BVAS HAS NOT REMOVED VOTERS REGISTER AS AGAINST THE HOLDING OF THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN.
4. DIRECT INFORMATION FROM BVAS MACHINES CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH THE INFORMATION FROM THE SERVER WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY NETWORK.
5. OYETOLA'S PETITION WAS DETERMINED UPON THE BVAS REPORT FROM SERVER NOT UPON THE PHYSICAL INFORMATION ON THE BVAS MACHINES WHICH HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE THE DAY AND TIME OF THE ELECTION.
6. BVAS MACHINE IS DIFFERENT FROM SERVER REPORT. BVAS IS THE DIRECT PRIMARY SOURCE, WHILE SERVER IS NOT, AS AGAINST THE VERDICT OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TRIBUNAL.
7. BVAS MACHINES USED FOR OSUN ELECTION WERE IN EVIDENCE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE INFORMATION ON THEM TALLIES WITH THE FORMS EC8A, THEREFORE NO DISCREPANCIES AS AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL.
8. SERVER CREATED DISCREPANCIES BY PRODUCING TWO DIFFERENT BVAS REPORTS, BUT THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES PRODUCED ONLY ONE WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN JETTISONED.
9. THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN PICKED THE SERVER REPORT WHICH THE PETITIONERS SERVED AS THE PILLAR OF THEIR CASE, ABANDONED THE LATER SERVER REPORT. THE TRIBUNAL EQUALLY CLOSED ITS EYES AGAINST THE BVAS MACHINES AND THE FORMS EC8As THAT WERE PHYSICALLY BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
10. THE TRIBUNAL WAGED A WAR AGAINST THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES AND THE DIRECT DATA EXTRACTED FROM THEM, WHEN INDEED THE WAR SHOULD BE AGAINST THE CONTROVERSIAL BVAS REPORTS.
11. THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN GRANTED AN ORDER FOR PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF THE BVAS MACHINES, YET CLOSED ITS EYES AGAINST THE REPORT OF THE SAID PHYSICAL INSPECTION INCLUDING THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES.
12. THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES, AND THE REPORT OF PHYSICAL INSPECTION DID NOT ESTABLISH OVER-VOTING AT ALL, BUT THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN WENT ON TO HOLD OVER-VOTING ON THE BASIS OF THE SERVER REPORT.
13. NIGERIANS AND THE WORLD SHOULD KNOW THAT THE DOCUMENT WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN HELD TO BE FORGERY WAS THE SAME DOCUMENT IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE SUPERIOR COURT OF APPEAL HAS VINDICATED ADELEKE, SINCE THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT HE ATTENDED EDE MUSLIM GRAMMAR SCHOOL AND SAT FOR WAEC. THE TRIBUNAL FAILED TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE SAID JUDGMENT WHICH CLEARED ADELEKE OF FORGERY.
14. NO NECO RESULT WAS CONTAINED IN ALL THE DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AS FALSELY BEING PEDDLED BY THE APC AND THEIR PROPAGANDISTS.
15. THE WHOLE WORLD SHOULD RISE TO DEFEND THE BVAS MACHINES AS AGAINST THE CONTROVERSIAL SERVER REPORTS UPON WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN BASED HIS JUDGMENT.
16. THE APC PROPAGANDISTS AND MERCINARIES ARE HOLDING ON TO BIG LIES, A BASELESS REPORT TO TOPPLE A VALIDLY ELECTED GOVERNOR.
17. THE WORLD SHOULD BE TOLD THAT BVAS MACHINES USED FOR OSUN 2022 GOVERNORSHIP ELECTION HAD NO PROBLEM, NO OVER-VOTING, BUT A SERVER REPORT WHICH THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN ERRONEOUSLY RELIED UPON.
18. THE TRIBUNAL CHAIRMAN LACKED JURISDICTION BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 51(1),(2),(3) & (4) OF THE ELECTORAL ACT, 2022, TO DECLARE OYETOLA THE WINNER AFTER CANCELLING VOTES OF THE PARTIES ON THE BASIS OF THE SERVER REPORT, EVEN THOUGH THE BVAS MACHINES THEMSELVES AND THE FORMS EC8As TENDERED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT ESTABLISH SUCH.
- Compiled by Hashim Abioye Esq.
https://www.facebook.com/100028527937018/posts/pfbid02MqVzVaWGp2TAvYJdz2dhGKiLGL8JiwuZ81Lkn5a59wfHxBarqy5RajkH4MVye8DYl/?app=fbl |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by victorsola: 12:29pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
Johnnyessence:
Oyetola will lose both in Appeal court and Supreme Court of justice
Few points on this judgement:
1. The first report given to APC actually showed over-voting in more than 700 polling units. It is actually around 1500 polling units or thereabout including units APC won. Therefore, the alleged over-voting is widespread although APC based their petition on units they lost (700). This was alluded to in the minority judgement. Therefore, it is not restricted to where PDP won.
2. The second report given to PDP was better but was also showing over-voting in some units as well. The majority ruling of the tribunal claimed that INEC colluded with PDP in the pendency of the petition by APC to produce the second reports. However, this argument is puerile at best by two reasons (a) PDP is entitled to ask for the same forms/reports given to APC to defend the petition and can only ask for it in the pendency of the petition. Why would the winner of election ask for BVAS report? PDP won the election. They asked for the report after studying the petition of APC.
(b) The second BVAS report cannot be said to be tampered with because it still showed over-voting as claimed by APC although in less polling units across the state.
3. The two reports are contradictory leaving the PDP to then ask for physical inspection of the BVAS machines. At least the reports are generated by BVAS machines. The BVAS machines were brought to the open court and inspected and the data there correspond with the election results. Now, there were three evidences. 2 BVAS reports (printed from server, mind you) and one physical reports of the BVAS machines in the open court. In fact the two BVAS reports are not in tandem with the results of the physical inspection of the BVAS machines. The majority ruling decided to go with first BVAS report, neglecting 2nd BVAS validly given to PDP and the data on the BVAS itself.
4. In the majority judgement, the judge harped heavily and compared the veracity of the two BVAS reports. He said the 2nd BVAS report is doctored. Okay, but what of the BVAS machines itself? Is it also doctored? The tribunal gave permission to inspect the machines by the two parties and everyone in court saw there was no over-voting in BVAS machines but the tribunal didn't even take a position on the results of BVAS inspection in their ruling.
5. The tribunal didn't dabble into whether the results of BVAS machines inspection are accurate or tampered with as well. The question is, are BVAS machines tampered with as well? I will answer in negative by two reasons:
(a) we learned that only the chairman of INEC and director of ICT can have access to data stored on the BVAS machines. Even one of them cannot access the machines data without the cooperation of other. We all know that immediately after election and after tribunal started sitting, the BVAS machines were housed in the tribunal and not with INEC in Osogbo.
(b) The second reason why I believe that the machines were not tampered with was because the inspection of the machines showed over-voting in 6 units. If INEC had tampered with it, no polling units will report over-voting.
5. There were 3 members of the tribunal. The chairman wrote the leading judgment and other member wrote minority judgement. The third member of the panel did not agree with either the majority or minority judgements in the open court. After reading of the judgment by the chairman, the third member only greeted people and say goodbye. No concurrence or otherwise. I dare to say there is no judgement of that tribunal.
In conclusion, I believe the fight is actually against BVAS machines to erode the confidence of people on the machines or INEC and bring apathy in the forthcoming general election. Everybody should endeavour to get their PVC and vote wisely. Your vote will count. read . There is nothing like Supreme Court for this kind of case . Go check the new electoral act . |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by Menclothing: 12:32pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
Funny nation |
| Re: Osun: How BVAS Exposed PDP’s Rigging Machine By Ismail Omipidan by victorsola: 12:32pm On Jan 30, 2023 |
|
