Read on Twitter
During the 2017 general election & subsequent petition there was too much noise that some questions remained unasked.
My experience:
I was in charge of a polling station (a PO). As required, I called forth all party/candidate agents all day, during tallying & announcement...
My experience:
I was in charge of a polling station (a PO). As required, I called forth all party/candidate agents all day, during tallying & announcement...
Parties & independent candidates had sent agents. Some arrived in the morning & others later. Though some had authorisation documents that didn't meet all the requirements, after consultation with RO, I allowed them to act for their parties/candidates. None was closed out. NONE.
It was however dumbfounding that a number of parties with presidential candidates had no agents. Appointing agents was party's/candidate's prerogative. Where they didn't, I reckoned it was a deliberate decision by respective parties/candidates.
What was I to do?
What was I to do?
Tallying was meticulous & correct tallies were recorded for each candidate, absence of their agents not withstanding, & results submitted. Interestingly, incumbent governor, who was defending his seat, didn't have an agent.
Note: a number of independent observers were present.
Note: a number of independent observers were present.
When the petition documents were filed, I was surprised that my polling station had been flagged for anomalies. The issue was, NASA agent had not signed the result declaration forms.
The party never said they had an agent or that the agent was not allowed to sign the forms..
The party never said they had an agent or that the agent was not allowed to sign the forms..
Further, they didn't dispute the results announced as being the correct tally of their candidate's votes or that there were anomalies in voting process, tallying or recording. The truth was, they'd no agent at the polling station or if they'd, he/she never showed up.
These petition documents were never interrogated during the hearing & I never got to know the court verdict on what ought to have been done where no party agent was present. If indeed the party had not appointed an agent or the appointed agent never showed up, whose fault was it?
Shouldn't the party have provided proof that their agent was not allowed to witness/sign the forms before alleging anomaly in results declaration forms?
By failing to have agents & then relying on their absence as basis to dispute results, NASA was both insincere & malicious.
By failing to have agents & then relying on their absence as basis to dispute results, NASA was both insincere & malicious.
Political parties must take their full responsibilities in the electoral process instead of using own weaknesses as basis for election disputes. Election petitions must be based on genuine electoral issues attributable to election mismgt, not intentional snares by parties.
I don't dispute the fact that the elections were grossly mismanaged & therefore couldn't meet the threshold for credibility. However, not all issues raised were valid or free of malice. Sadly, petition's constitutional timeframe meant issues could not be properly ventilated.
