SouthSouth1914:


Sounds like a DISCLAIMER NOTICE!!

damkin24:
If the whole truth could be unrivalled about the whole thing it would be much better and help in future elections. But something just came to my mind that what if the judgment has been in favour of Adeleke and PDP I doubt if you would have written all this epistles.

SmartPolician:


BVAS is not used for voting; it's only used for accreditation. There's a difference, sir.

Yes, INEC can declare results without BVAS reports. What BVAS report does is to confirm that the number of people who voted is EQUAL to number of people it cleared to vote.

Where there's an overage, it's called over-voting, and Section 51 of the 2022 Electoral Law says that fresh election should be conducted there.

Instead, those two yeye judges who sat over Osun State guber tribunal (excluding one whose dissenting verdict didn't even show he understood that section of the law) declared Oyetola the winner. They deserve to be tied to a big tree in a marketplace and flogged 50 lashes of koboko each

I hope this helps....

muykem:
let me tell you the truth of the case. BVAS was used and worked effectively. Politicians with help of INE staff actually baypass BVAS in some places.

BluntCrazeMan:
Dear NIGERIANS..

We Should Not just brush-off all these issues about the INEC’s “BVAS-Report” so quickly.

(The irregularities in the recent Osun Tribunal Judgement are just too glaring for us to just quickly ignore them).

INEC is keeping so quiet about these irregularities, and their silence is no more healthy for us any longer.

Granted that the Electoral Act 2022 gave them the powers to use any technological innovations for the sake of elections (which we have no problems with), it does not mean that INEC can come anytime in the middle of the game to introduce “Anything” they like, without prior sensitisation and “Public Notice”, and hope it would be accepted by us.

INEC released the Guidelines for the elections, and made it very clear that Polling-units results would be transmitted directly to the “Collation Support and Result Verification System (CSRVS)” -- (which, in normal terms, is supposed to mean the “Elections Results-Collation Server”), and from this central CSRVS-Server, all the other Collation Centers (both at the Ward levels, LGA levels, {and State levels -- in the case of Presidential Elections}) MUST CONFIRM their collated results before transferring to the next higher Collation Center.

This directly implies that the information about the whole Polling-units which is contained inside the CSRVS-Server must have been completed before the announcement of the Final Results by the INEC.

Thus, any person that requests to have the “BVAS-Report” is actually most-definitely requesting for the CSRVS-Report, and that is, “the electronically transmitted and collated results” which INEC supposedly used to cross-check and confirm the collated election-results as the election was going on..
And this CSRVS-Report is supposed to be very much available immediately the Official Results are declared, because it means that the results that were Officially Declared are also supposed to fall in line with the CSRVS-Report too.

So now, there are lots of questions that are begging for answers..

1. What exactly is INEC supposed to mean by the term “BVAS-Report”, and why didn't they produce the “CSRVS-Report” instead.??

2. Even if the so-called BVAS-Report is different from the expected CSRVS-Report, then, why was it that the CSRVS-Server got all its data completely transmitted from the BVAS-Machines before the results were declared, yet the same BVAS-Machines couldn't also immediately transmit the accreditation details that were contained inside them to the so-called “Back-end BVAS-Server”??
In other words, why did the so-called “SYNCHRONISATION of BVAS Data” in the recent Osun Election take INEC 40 days to complete, whereas the e-transmission and e-collation of results took them less than 24-hours to complete.??


3. Why then did the INEC not produce the CSRVS-Report together with the so-called “Synchronised BVAS-Report” when they were trying to defend themselves with regards to the earlier incomplete “BVAS-Report” which they released to the APC.??
(Or are they trying to claim that the CSRVS-Report is such a useless document, and would not have done well in defending their claims.?)


INEC SHOULD STOP HIDING IN SILENCE, AND COME OUT AND EXPLAIN ALL THESE FOR US..

JAMO84:
The only reason why INEC declared Adeleke was because, they wanted to avoid inconclusive, otherwise, they would have cancelled some polling units due to over voting and declare re run, Adeleke would still have won.

Sterope:
The issue is still INEC and your country.

Why did INEC develop a software/using a technology that allows/count non accredited voters?

garfield1:


It seems we have to go back to card readers or inec sort out this accreditation issues.why wasn't this issues raised in ekiti

Bovis:

No brainer OP, the synchronised bvas was fraudulently arranged in Osun by INEC after receiving huge amounts of money from the Adeleke team - that’s why it took 40 days to produce after the election

gbogboija:
What happened in Osun is very simple, INEC was used to rub Osun people of mandate they gave to Adeleke.

Northernblood8:


No, rolams is not confused but you are the one that is.

I have used that BVAS and I know how it works. You are not supposed to vote if either of the following fails.

Authentication using Thumbprint or Surname or last 6 digits of your card number

AND

Verification by facial recognition.

If either or both fails, you are not supposed to vote. If you vote, the result from that polling unit will be cancelled as number of Accredited voters will become less than total votes.

It is very important that people are educated properly before the election day so that you won't end up destroying the chances of your preferred presidential candidate.

Afamed:


Read the new electoral law. Where there is over voting , the law says , the units should be canceled and winner announced .

How do you deter elections riggers , when you still allow them to do re run in polling units where they have earlier commit crime of over voting?

That is what the judges have done

Parachoko:
Thank you

Will the case be rounded up at the Appeal Court within 30 days?

benedictuyi:

Regarding this BVAS, I have a question.

For example, let's say party A has strong hold in a particular polling unit. In order to nullify the result from that unit, won't it be easy for party B to send unregistered agents to cause over voting?

rolams:


You are mixing two things, the result announced was based on the captured ones. It is captured and send. But accreditation was done on the BVAS from morning till end of the voting process. Result is just one file, but accreditation is gotten different files of individual data, it will be later compiled in unit data file.

Afamed:


From Tribunal to Supreme court. They have 180 days to determine the case.

As it stands now, Appeal court has 60 days to determine the case,

Then from there supreme court also has 60 days

SmartPolician:


First, you should be thanking me for telling you what BVAS is before stupidly sounding sophisticated.

Second, if up till Supreme Court that yeye tribunal verdict is not quashed, just know that this country is gone. I am not here to argue law with you; Nairaland is not a law court.

savcy:


The issue is those who voted without accreditation weren't captured by the BVAS, hence the Tribunal's verdict. What that OP said is true. The BVAS has gone through every manipulation tests prior to its acceptance and approval by INEC. The machine is an intelligent piece of hardware that accredits according to process. If ever there's over-voting recorded in any PU, the BVAS would have the authentic number of voters. So those thugs and saboteurs who plan on intimidating adhoc staff and force authentication and voting would only end up denting their preferred candidate's chances.

Northernblood8:


No, rolams is not confused but you are the one that is.

I have used that BVAS and I know how it works. You are not supposed to vote if either of the following fails.

Authentication using Thumbprint or Surname or last 6 digits of your card number

AND

Verification by facial recognition.

If either or both fails, you are not supposed to vote. If you vote, the result from that polling unit will be cancelled as number of Accredited voters will become less than total votes.

It is very important that people are educated properly before the election day so that you won't end up destroying the chances of your preferred presidential candidate.

DesChyko:


Noted. And what happens after the result is cancelled?

Parachoko:
They will be detected while going through BVAS, it will show they are not suppose to vote at such a polling unit.

SmartPolician:


Gone in this context means NO HOPE again because the judiciary ought to be the last hope of the hopeless or someone whose right has been trampled upon.

adesola89:

The facts About Osun Election Tribunal Judgement
(1.) Election was conducted at the polling units and after the election the presiding officer checked the BVAS machine for the accreditation figures in the presence of the party agents. The party agents of APC and PDP signed the EC8A forms confirming the adequacy of the information on the BVAS machine.
2) After the election, the presiding officer is expected to press a button on the BVAS machine to transfer the accreditation figures on the BVAS machine to the back end server which will be uploading each of the accredited voters on the server. Meanwhile, if the BVAS machine shut down before the complete transmission of the accreditation data, it will stop and will not reflect on the back end server. This implies backend server will read false over voting.
3). The announcement of the winner by INEC on the 17th of July, 2022 was based on the information on the BVAS machine not the back end server because some were asking on what basis was the winner declared if the server data were incomplete.
Now to the petition
4). APC applied for the BVAS report on the 17th of July, 2022, the day the results was announced and INEC printed the report from their back end server. This report shows false over voting in 1750 polling units across the 30 local governments in Osun State. If the 1750 polling units where over voting occurred were considered, Adeleke would have still been leading with over 20, 000 votes. However, APC only took 749 polling units of these from 10 local governments which are Adeleke's strong holds including Ede North, Ede South and Osogbo LGs to the court.

5). Seeing the petition of APC, Adeleke and PDP equally applied to INEC for BVAS report from back end server in August, 2022. INEC issued the report printed from back end server to them. This report shows false over voting in about 150 polling units across the state.

6). The above showed there is discrepancy between the two reports from the back end server. INEC official who issued the two reports came to testify that the initial report issued to APC was incomplete while the one issued to PDP is after synchronization.

7). Meanwhile, PDP sought the order of tribunal to carry out the inspection of BVAS machine of which an expert was invited. The findings of the physical inspection of the machine suggest that the data on the form EC8As issued at the polling units are the same in the BVAS machine except in six polling units. The BVAS machines in the contested polling units numbering about 1000 were brought to the court and the report of the physical inspection by expert was admitted by the tribunal. In the six polling units, Adeleke scored about 1000 votes and Oyetola had 700 votes.

. The chairman of the panel in his judgement ignored the report from the BVAS machine itself which is the primary source of evidence and instead based his judgement on the report from the server issued to APC which INEC said was incomplete.

9). The minority judgement which affirms Adeleke on the other hand prefers the report from the BVAS machine itself brought to the court. He argued that primary source of evidence is superior to the secondary source which is even controversial in this case.

Now the questions are:
Why will the tribunal chairman ignored the BVAS machine put in front of him but prefers server report which was said to be incomplete even by INEC?
Why didn't the judge take note of the fact that APC agents signed the form ECAs in all the contested 749 polling units.
It is left for the people of sane mind to judge.

JAMO84:
The only reason why INEC declared Adeleke was because, they wanted to avoid inconclusive, otherwise, they would have cancelled some polling units due to over voting and declare re run, Adeleke would still have won.

BluntCrazeMan:
Dear NIGERIANS..

We Should Not just brush-off all these issues about the INEC’s “BVAS-Report” so quickly.

(The irregularities in the recent Osun Tribunal Judgement are just too glaring for us to just quickly ignore them).

INEC is keeping so quiet about these irregularities, and their silence is no more healthy for us any longer.

Granted that the Electoral Act 2022 gave them the powers to use any technological innovations for the sake of elections (which we have no problems with), it does not mean that INEC can come anytime in the middle of the game to introduce “Anything” they like, without prior sensitisation and “Public Notice”, and hope it would be accepted by us.

INEC released the Guidelines for the elections, and made it very clear that Polling-units results would be transmitted directly to the “Collation Support and Result Verification System (CSRVS)” -- (which, in normal terms, is supposed to mean the “Elections Results-Collation Server”), and from this central CSRVS-Server, all the other Collation Centers (both at the Ward levels, LGA levels, {and State levels -- in the case of Presidential Elections}) MUST CONFIRM their collated results before transferring to the next higher Collation Center.

This directly implies that the information about the whole Polling-units which is contained inside the CSRVS-Server must have been completed before the announcement of the Final Results by the INEC.

Thus, any person that requests to have the “BVAS-Report” is actually most-definitely requesting for the CSRVS-Report, and that is, “the electronically transmitted and collated results” which INEC supposedly used to cross-check and confirm the collated election-results as the election was going on..
And this CSRVS-Report is supposed to be very much available immediately the Official Results are declared, because it means that the results that were Officially Declared are also supposed to fall in line with the CSRVS-Report too.

So now, there are lots of questions that are begging for answers..

1. What exactly is INEC supposed to mean by the term “BVAS-Report”, and why didn't they produce the “CSRVS-Report” instead.??

2. Even if the so-called BVAS-Report is different from the expected CSRVS-Report, then, why was it that the CSRVS-Server got all its data completely transmitted from the BVAS-Machines before the results were declared, yet the same BVAS-Machines couldn't also immediately transmit the accreditation details that were contained inside them to the so-called “Back-end BVAS-Server”??
In other words, why did the so-called “SYNCHRONISATION of BVAS Data” in the recent Osun Election take INEC 40 days to complete, whereas the e-transmission and e-collation of results took them less than 24-hours to complete.??


3. Why then did the INEC not produce the CSRVS-Report together with the so-called “Synchronised BVAS-Report” when they were trying to defend themselves with regards to the earlier incomplete “BVAS-Report” which they released to the APC.??
(Or are they trying to claim that the CSRVS-Report is such a useless document, and would not have done well in defending their claims.?)


INEC SHOULD STOP HIDING IN SILENCE, AND COME OUT AND EXPLAIN ALL THESE FOR US..

sparko1:


Let's follow your process, there was an interruption and the result wasn't transmitted to the back end.

1. Which figure was then used to certify the result?

2. If the machine stops transmission, where does the information get stored on, on a temporary storage device which can be accessed? (we already said it can't be online because it stopped sending), if that is the case why do we need the BVAS in the first place?

The whole reason for the the BVAS is so information can be sent electronically and immediately, if the BVAS machine still have to be taken to the collation center and be checked manually, INEC have succeeded in nothing, no different.

3. I am a Computer Scientist, and from what I know, the information is already on INEC server, the information was uploaded into the database when we registered, so what the BVAS does is compare the information captured with what is in the database, once that is confirmed the individual is cleared and allowed to vote.

Once the voting is done, they don't need to Send pictures, the list of names and unique code is sent to the database for confirmation and collation.

It does not matter when the information is accessed, even during the voting, you should be able to see those who have been accredited by BVAS from anywhere, if this is not the case, then BVAS is USELESS.