A witness from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Mr. Haruna Ibrahim, expressed his shock when he learned that the candidate from his party, Asue Ighodalo, had recorded notable votes in his polling unit.
The witness had not expected Ighodalo to receive any votes, stating that he anticipated a result of zero across the board.
His surprise was evident during his testimony at the Governorship Elections Petition hearing in Abuja, where he explained, “I was expecting to see zero, zero, zero recorded in all the columns, but I am surprised that I am now seeing figures here.”
Ibrahim, who was tasked with representing the PDP at the polling unit, stated that he had fully expected the results to show no votes for Ighodalo. In fact, he was convinced that the entire polling unit’s results would be blank, with “000” listed in every column, a notion that seemed to be based on his own presumptions rather than any concrete evidence. Despite this expectation, he was startled by the figures that appeared on the official result, which revealed that Ighodalo had indeed received a number of votes.
Despite this unexpected result, Ibrahim continued to express confusion over the process. He went on to claim that there had been over-voting at his polling unit but still proceeded to sign the result, an act that raised questions about his integrity. He defended his decision to sign the result by stating, “I needed a copy of the result for my party, so I decided to sign it.” This justification highlighted the tension between his claims of electoral malpractice and his actions, which contradicted his earlier protest.
The witness admitted that, despite his claims of over-voting, he had never filed a formal written protest, a standard practice when challenging election irregularities. Instead, he handed over the result to the Ward Collation Agent for his party without submitting any official documentation to back his claims of malpractice. This absence of written records left him without tangible proof to present to the court, rendering his allegations less credible.
Furthermore, the official result from the polling unit, which showed 120 votes for the All Progressives Congress (APC), 75 votes for PDP, and 6 rejected votes, totaling 201 votes, did not appear to exceed the number of accredited voters. Ibrahim, however, initially stated that the results did not surpass the number of accredited voters. When pressed under cross-examination, he shifted his stance, asserting, “that is not true. There was over-voting, and I complained and requested that the results be cancelled.” His conflicting statements on this issue left his credibility in question, as he had earlier affirmed that the total votes matched the accredited voters, only to change his story later.
To further complicate the matter, Ibrahim was shown a BVAS (Bimodal Voter Accreditation System) machine to verify the accreditation records. However, he was unable to operate the machine because it was not switched on, and he admitted that he had no knowledge of how to use the device since he had never interacted with it before.
Despite this, Ibrahim insisted that over-voting had occurred, relying on BVAS data to support his claim. His inability to demonstrate any understanding of the technology he referred to further weakened his argument and added confusion to his testimony.
Ultimately, the contradictions in Ibrahim’s statements, coupled with his lack of evidence and understanding of the tools he referenced, cast doubt on the validity of his claims.
About The Author
