Mr. Hitler Nwala, a digital forensics expert, described how he discovered that the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, erased the results of the presidential election that took place on February 25 before the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, in Abuja, on Thursday.
As the 25th witness for Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who is contesting President Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the presidential election, Mr. Nwala mounted the box.
The witness claimed during her testimony before the five-person panel headed by Justice Haruna Tsammani that the results that were deleted were recorded on the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, or BVAS, machines that were used to carry out the elections.
In order to prove their claim that the presidential election was rigged in Tinubu’s favour, Atiku and his party insisted that data from the BVAS machines, which were used to certify voters and upload polling unit results, would be necessary.
Meanwhile, Mr. Nwala, who was led in evidence by lead counsel for the petitioners, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, stated that he was summoned as a witness in the case by a subpoena.
He testified in court that he specifically inspected and performed forensic analysis on 110 BVAS deployed for the conduct of the presidential election in the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, Abuja.
Upon his inquiry, the electoral body claimed that it had to erase the information in the BVAS in order to redeploy them for the March 18 Governorship and State Houses of Assembly elections.
However, during the cross-examination of the witness, counsel to INEC, Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, criticised the witness’s report, emphasising that 110 BVAS devices used in the election were insufficient to establish that there was any irregularity on the part of the Commission.
While arguing that the sample size used by the witness to write his report was too small, Mahmoud, SAN noted that a total of 3, 263 BVAS devices were deployed during the presidential election.
He contended that the sample on which the witness based his report represented only about 3.5 percent of the total device deployed by INEC in the FCT and 0.06 percent of the total BVAS used for the presidential election across the country.
It will be remembered that INEC stated that it needed to “re-configure” all of the BVAS machines used in the presidential election in order to use them in the next round of elections.
Both President Tinubu’s legal team, led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, and the APC’s legal team, led by Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, urged the court to reject the witness’ report, which they said was riddled with obvious errors.
Nonetheless, the petitioners’ counsel, Uche, SAN, described the witness’ evidence as critical to his clients’ case, “considering that it was the first time in this country that we had a technologically driven election,” he added.
The petitioners tendered bundles of certified copies of INEC’s Forms EC8A from 20 Local Government Areas, LGAs, in Ogun state from the Bar shortly after the witness was discharged by the court.
Mr. Eyitayo Jegede, SAN, a member of Atiku’s legal team, submitted the documents.
Certified copies of polling unit results (Form EC8A series) from 17 LGAs in Ondo state, 27 LGAs in Jigawa, and 20 LGAs in Rivers state were also tendered in evidence by the petitioners.
INEC objected to the admissibility of the documents in evidence, stating that it would explain its reasoning in its final written address.
Similarly, the other Respondents–President Tinubu and the APC–opposed the admission of the electoral documents into evidence.
Despite the objections, the Justice Tsammani panel admitted the documents as evidence and designated them as Exhibits in the case.
The court then adjourned its proceedings until Friday to allow the petitioners to close their case, after which the Respondents will present their defence.
