A lawyer and founder of the Nigeria Election Petition Organisation, Ameze Belo-Osagie, has expressed concerns about how Nigerian courts have handled electronic evidence in election petitions, particularly those involving the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS). In an interview with ARISE NEWS, Osagie stated that BVAS technology should simplify electoral disputes, such as allegations of overvoting. She suggested that petitioners could rely on BVAS accreditation records, the voter register, and the number of votes recorded to demonstrate discrepancies.
According to Osagie, some cases involving electronic evidence have failed because courts misinterpreted or overinterpreted a Supreme Court precedent on BVAS evidence. The precedent reportedly required challengers to bring not just the BVAS report but also the actual physical BVAS machines into the courtroom. Osagie described this trend as concerning and one of the significant emerging issues from her research into election litigation.
Osagie's research examined over 3,300 election tribunal judgments spanning more than two decades. The study found that qualification disputes were among the most successful categories of election petitions, partly because they can be supported by documentary evidence. In contrast, other forms of electoral malpractice, such as vote-buying and violence, are more difficult to establish due to the high evidential standards required by the courts.
Osagie argued that election litigation should focus on establishing facts about what happened during an election, regardless of whether the court changes the declared result. She stated that the court process is an engine of fact-finding, but its value is reduced when cases are disposed of on technical grounds rather than through a detailed examination of the evidence.
Looking ahead to the 2027 elections, Osagie emphasized the importance of pre-election litigation in determining who is eligible to appear on the ballot before voting begins. She also called for greater transparency from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), arguing that wider disclosure of election information would allow Nigerians and litigants to better understand how results were produced.
Osagie suggested that electoral reforms should focus on making malpractice more difficult to commit in the first place, rather than relying primarily on litigation to address violations after elections. This approach would help to reduce the number of disputes and ensure the integrity of the electoral process.
The concerns raised by Osagie highlight the need for courts to adapt to the use of technology in elections and to develop clear guidelines for handling electronic evidence. The effective use of BVAS and other technologies is crucial to ensuring the credibility and transparency of elections in Nigeria.
Key points
- Lawyer Ameze Belo-Osagie raises concerns over Nigerian courts' misinterpretation of Supreme Court precedent on BVAS evidence.
- Osagie's research highlights the challenges of establishing electoral malpractice in court due to high evidential standards.
- Electoral reforms should focus on preventing malpractice rather than relying on litigation to address violations.
