In the Tribunal, Mr Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s presidential candidate, had contested Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s election victory.
In his appeal, Peter Obi argued that there had been an instance of overvoting for the respondent, Bola Tinubu and that the court should proclaim him the winner of the election.
Lawyer Oluwole Osaze Uzzi, a former INEC director of voter education, asserted that Form EC8A or other data used to make voting-related decisions could not be utilised in court.
He noted that the petitioner would have to demonstrate in court that there was overvoting with complete trust in the BVAS in the Presidential election tribunal proceedings. He claimed that the Osun state election served as a strong indication from the Supreme Court that the legal court would not use expert data analysis to determine to overvote. He contends that while a petitioner may have a strong argument, it must follow the legal procedures outlined in the election statute.
In the case of Osun state, there was reliance on a few exhibits that were certified true copies of the download from the IReV, he claimed. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court’s ruling instructed that we examine the BVAS Machine.
If you take a look at it, the BVAS machine automatically stores how many persons it has accredited. The Supreme Court claims that overvoting must now be proven and that the BVAS, not the form EC8A, determines whether overvoting occurred. And this is what the Presidential election tribunal will use.
