FIJ
Exactly seven days before the September 21, 2024 Edo State governorhsip election, Godwin Obaseki, the state’s then governor, described the exercise as a ‘do-or-die affair’ with violence and manipulation in the offing.
“This election is do or die; if they do, we will die. Next Saturday by this time, vote for the PDP [Peoples Democratic Party] to become the next governor,” he said during his party’s rally in the Ekemwan area of the state.
As 17 political parties prepared for election day, over 35,000 policemen arrived in the state. Military personnel and officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) joined to boost security and help the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
When the exercise ended, Frank Mba, a Deputy Inspector-General of Police (DIG) charged with security during the election, said the conduct was peaceful and there were no incidents of violence or manipulation.
But FIJ has found contradictory evidence that the conduct was flawed before, during and after election day.
“Throughout this election, there was no single threat recorded,” Mba said during a press briefing on September 23. “The election was violent-free. There was no recorded incident of the kidnapping, assault, or molestation of any INEC staff, other persons, or other stakeholders involved in the elections.
“There was no recorded incident of arson, no recorded incident of serious assault on the police or members of other law enforcement agencies. We were able to keep the land, the air, and the waterway safe. Citizens were able to go out and cast their votes with minimal incidents.”
This account was inaccurate.
IN ETSAKO WEST, VIOLENCE MET MALPRACTICE
When the election ended, INEC announced that Monday Okpebholo, the All Progressives Congress’ (APC) candidate, garnered 291,667 valid votes, with PDP’s Asue Ighodalo getting 247,274 votes, and Olumide Akpata of the Labour Party (LP) 22,763 votes, making up the top three of the 17 candidates. The gap between winner and runner-up was 44,393 votes.
The commission relied on results from all 18 local government areas in the state, but one stood out: Etsako West.
Sources told FIJ that INEC did not have the result of collated ballots for this LGA’s 12 wards but went on to announce a total without them. Emerging victorious here, the APC got 32,107 votes, while the PDP got 17,483 — a whopping gap of 14,624 votes.
To verify the claim of unavailability of authentic results, FIJ obtained certified true copies of collated results from all LGAs. The CTC INEC provided for Etsako West had two unique features: a conspicuous ‘Replacement Copy’ text printed atop it and no stamp on the bottom right of the page, making it different from all copies from the other 17 LGAs.
FIJ has attached CTCs of Uhunmwonde and Esan South West LGAs below to show a clear disparity with the one for Etsako West. This begged the question: what happened to the results for this one LGA?
WHERE DID THE RESULT SHEETS GO?
FIJ learnt that in the early hours of September 22, when INEC officials were collating the LGA’s results at the Auchi Council Hall, bullets began raining on the building.
It was some time around 3 am, and the sound came first before the hall’s occupants understood the situation. Benji Ojietu, deputy chairman of the LGA, was hit. A bullet tore through the darkness, shattering windows and penetrating his right shoulder, leaving entry and exit wounds.
‘THE POLICE DID IT. NONBODY ELSE’
“We were still collating 10 wards’ results and awaiting results from ward 11 and one other when it happened,” he told FIJ in December.
“On our way to the venue earlier, there was heavy police and military presence there, and there also was a Department of State Services (DSS) office nearby, so how did anyone gain entry to shoot up the place when we weren’t even allowed to drive in?”
Ojietu did not see the attackers, and he said the police made no arrests in connection to the incident. Three months later, he believes those who did it were familiar.
”The INEC officials conducting the exercise that morning left the hall before the shooting began,” Ojietu added. “During the encounter, there was no return fire. All the shots came into the building, and people fled for their lives.”
When FIJ asked who he thought was responsible for the attack, he said, “The police did it. No one else had access.”
When the Athena Centre for Policy and Leadership published its report on the election, the CSO said INEC could not provide CTC for two 12 wards; 11 in Etsako West and one in Ikpoba Okha. For the latter, the commission cancelled results in this single ward, but there was no explanation for the missing CTC for the former until FIJ found one.
‘INEC ANNOUNCD RESULTS WITHOUT RESULT SHEETS’
A source present at the collation hall where the shooting occurred, showed FIJ copies of the collated results they obtained from the venue. This source, who sought anonymity for fear of attack, said they recovered the sheets after the incident, and were taking it to Benin City, the Edo State Capital, when they learnt INEC had announced results for Etsako West.
”How did INEC get the figures when there were no ballots or sheets to rely on?” This source rhetorically quizzed. “I reported this development and kept the result sheets in my possession until a time when it would be needed.”
INEC could not provide CTCs for 11 of the 12 wards in this LGA — because the commission did not have them.
All 10,928 VOTES LOST. ZERO RESULTS IN IKPOBA OKHA’S MOST POPULATED WARD
After INEC announced results for an LGA without election materials, the commission said it was still awaiting results to arrive from Oredo and Ikpoba Okha LGAs.
Faruk Adamu Kuta, the commission’s Returning Officer, announced the suspension of the exercise on September 22, saying collation officers from the outstanding LGAs were yet to arrive with their reports. Well, these results later arrived.
Two days later, INEC and the APC issued statements explaining why collation could not occur in those areas. According to them, Mba had claimed there were security threats, and it was only safer to collate in Benin, the capital city.
Meanwhile, when the results sheet arrived in Benin, there were figures for all but Oregbeni ward in Ikpoba Okha, with 10,928 accredited voters. There, the commission cancelled results. Why? INEC never said.
In its form EC40G, INEC indicates one of four reasons for vote cancellation: over voting, non-replacement of BVAs after failure, declared emergency/disruption, or inability to deploy men and material. For cancelled results in some of this LGA’s polling units, the commission ticked the third box, but for this ward, there were no forms explaining the reason for cancellation. All 10,928 votes were lost.
On December 20, FIJ called Rita Amadi, head of INEC’s legal department whose signature appears on the CTC, but she refused to comment, saying the matter was before a tribunal.
At this time, three things had already happened:
- INEC announced results for an LGA where physical election materials were lost during a violent attack
- The commission cancelled election results for a ward without saying why, then said DIG Frank Mba told them there was a violence scare
- Mba claimed after the election that there were no violence incidents across the state
RAMPANT OVER-VOTING MARS CONDUCT
The most common reason for vote cancellation during the Edo election was over-voting. Where Bimodal Voter Accreditation (BVA) systems failed, the commission resorted to manual accreditation, consequently leading to manipulations.
Sometimes, these were spotted, but other times the manipulated results made it through.
In Polling Unit 8, Ward 10 (Ologbo) of Ikpoba Okha, only 130 of the 794 registered voters were accredited, but in INEC’s Form EC8A, the APC scored 66 votes, while the PDP scored an impossible 258 votes. In words, the PDP’s votes were written as ‘Two hundred and fifteen six’. This showed over-voting occurred in this polling unit.
FIJ spotted several cancellations on the Form EC8A document, indicating it was manipulated, and while the total number of valid votes were written as ‘Three hundred and thirty’ in words, ‘331’ was written in figures, while ‘130’ for accredited voters remained unchanged in figures.
FIJ also spotted that no agent signed the copy for the APC or the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
However, when this result was entered into the Form EC8B for ward collations, the numbers were different. Accredited voters became 413, APC’s votes became 247, and the PDP scored 54.
According to the figures on the Form EC8B, APC defeated all parties in all 20 polling units in this ward, but the Forms EC8A tell a different story. While the polling unit result was clearly manipulated to favour the PDP, the ward collation documents were manipulated to favour the APC. As was the case with several other polling units, INEC did not cancel results from this polling unit, but released copies of both contradictory documents as proof of a credible election.
A similar case occurred in Ward 2, Polling Unit 6 of Egor LGA. In the CTC, the presiding officer did not input their name on the document. This document also had inputs which showed evidence of manipulation.
In the slot for APC’s votes, the words ‘Thirty Eight’ can be seen clearly occupying the space there, while ‘Four Hundred’ is written in smaller size above it, indicating the latter was added after the former. To the left of that box is a space for the party’s results to be written in numbers. Here, ‘438’ is written, but ‘4’ appears to be the only number in the row that touches the margin, and is squeezed as though it was added later.
INEC MAGIC: 74 ACCREDITED VOTERS, 474 VOTES FOR APC
These were not the only disparities. FIJ spotted that while the total number of accredited voters in this polling unit reads ‘474’, the total number of valid votes also reads ‘474’ despite there being inputs of ‘1’ each for spoiled and rejected ballots.
On closer inspection of the document, FIJ found that as was the case with APC’s result here, the number ‘4’ was added before ’74’ to inflate the figure. Of the 726 registered voters here, only 74 were accredited, leaving 656 of the 730 supplied ballots unused. How did 656 become ‘054’ in the document? FIJ observed that while two ballots were rendered useless, the remaining unused ballots were ‘654’ but the ‘6’ in 654 was left untouched as it looked like a zero.
FIJ also obtained a copy of this polling unit’s result sheet on the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV). The copy matched this newspaper’s original findings.
RESULT ALTERATION FOR APC IN OVER 300 PUs
FIJ found that in at least 90 polling units, this result manipulation favoured the PDP, but it was in the APC’s favour in at least 300 polling units. The two leading parties were not the only ones with inflated polling unit results, however; other parties had these inflated numbers but in fewer units.
Inflation occurred in several ways. In some cases, the figures on the IReV portal were different from figures in the CTC, while in other cases, despite the IReV and CTC agreeing, the imputed figures in the Form EC8B differed from results in these two documents. No fewer than 125 polling units suffered this fate. Votes were added for the APC or/and deducted from the PDP. In some cases, they were added for both parties.
In Egor’s Ward 2, the APC scored 7,105, while the PDP scored 1,076. In Ward 10 of Ikpoba Okha, APC got 4,816, while the PDP bagged 1,004. These figures created a 9,841-vote gap between both parties, but like several wards across the 18 LGAs, results here were marred by overvoting and results manipulation INEC spearheaded and also defended in writing when responding to petitions before the election tribunal in Benin.
In Egor Ward 2 alone, there were 23 polling units with CTC results different from what were in the forms EC8A (Polling Unit result sheets).
Connect with us on our socials: