The February 23 Presidential election would have been a nullity, had the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) adopted electronic transmission of results.
Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), made the submission in an interview with Akelicious.
Sagay said that the subsisting electoral act provides for a manual process, and anything to the contrary, would have amounted to an illegality.
According to him, electronic transmission of results to a server would have provided a fertile ground for the loser of the election to seek its nullification, save for the fact that same did not exist, in the eye of the law.
“To start with, electronic transfer of results was itself not legitimate under our law. Our law makes it quite clear that the present system that we have is manual. And you know, two or three times the President refused to sign anything electronic voting, electronic transfer and so on,” Sagay said.
He noted thus: “So, there is no law. And if they had done it, the whole election would have been null and void; if they had used electronic system. That is the first issue.
“At that stage, the loser of the election could now have brought an action, that the whole process of transmission of results was illegal. And, that would have brought it down, because there is no provision for it at all in our law. The present provision only provides for manual transfer, and it is stated stage-by-stage.
“That is why I don’t understand the whole purpose of this legal action based on existence of a server, which is an illegal entity, as far as the law is concerned.”
Meanwhile, the PACAC boss has underscored the need for accountability on the part of the electoral body, in the event that funds may have been set aside for possible electronic transmission of results and maintenance of a server.
The electoral commission has since denied having a central server for purposes of electronic transmission of the presidential poll.