Labour Party Spokesperson Kenneth Okonkwo, expressed his astonishment after realizing that the Supreme Court had ignored paragraphs 48A and B, which are essential for overseeing the collation and certification of voter-accredited resultse…CONTINUE READING>>...CONTINUE READING
He claimed the Supreme Court’s ruling that IREV uploads were voluntary ran against to the letter of the statute. He stressed that such uploading shouldn’t be used as justification if it isn’t required by law.
Okonkwo mentioned that paragraph 93 may not apply to this issue because it does not deal with collation in an interview with Arise TV. In addition, he disclosed that if Form EC8A is unavailable, electronic transmission results and IREV-uploaded results must be used.
According to him, “Allow me to elaborate on the inconsistency, Even though paragraph 93 suggests otherwise, the Supreme Court ruled that IREV uploads are not required.
The declaration of results must be made using the electronic results transmitted and the results uploaded on IREV if Form EC8A is unavailable.
If results uploading to IREV is not required by law, then what justification may there be for doing so? They emphasised paragraph 93, which does not apply because it has nothing to do with the collation process. Paragraphs 48A and 48B are applicable for this sorting.
That the Supreme Court didn’t even acknowledge their existence surprises me. Let me elaborate: There shall be collation only when the collation officer confirms the veracity of the result in the BVAS of the accredited voters…CONTINUE READING>>
