RESULTS TRANSMISSION VIA ELECTRONIC: COURT REJECTS LP'S CLAIM AGAINST INEC

An action brought by the Labour Party (LP) to force the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to use electronic means of communicating the results of the 2023 elections was dismissed by a Federal High Court in Abuja.

According to Judge Emeka Nwite's ruling, Section 52(2) of the Electoral Act of 2022—cited by Monday Mawah, the party's attorney—provided for voting and the transmission of results in line with a process that would be decided by INEC.

He interprets this to mean that the commission is free to specify or pick the method of disseminating election results.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) received a copy of the ruling issued by Judge Nwite on January 23 before the presidential and National Assembly elections occurred on February 25.

The LP sued INEC as a single respondent by filing the original summons, designated FHC/ABJ/CS/1454/2022, on August 22, 2022, through its attorney.

The party urged the court to decide whether the commission can still insist on manual collation of results in the general elections given the combined effect of sections 47 (2), 50 (2), 60(4), 60(5), and 62 (1)(2) and other pertinent provisions of the Election Act 2022.

In the event that the issue was decided in its favor, the LP requested two injunctive reliefs.

They consist of, "a declaration that the respondent has no power to opt for manual method other than the electronic method provided for by the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022," and a court judgment requiring INEC to adhere to the Electoral Act 2022's requirements for electronic transmission of general election results.

However, INEC did not reply to the lawsuit or submit any paperwork.

Mawah argued that because manual collation of results was not covered by the Election Act of 2022, it must be rejected or denied by the court in light of the law's provisions.

Judge Nwite gave the verdict and stated: "It is indeed a trite law that the function of the court is no more than interpreting the law.

"In interpreting the law, the court is enjoined to interpret the status as they are without going outside them to bring in what the court would think was intended."

He asserts that the court's tasks and responsibilities in the interpretation of a statute include giving the statute's explicit and unambiguous language meaning and force.

The Election Act of 2022's Sections 50(2), 60(5), and 62(2) were the points of contention, the judge concluded after hearing the plaintiff's attorney's argument.

According to him: "The provision of Section 60(5) of the Electoral Act, 2022, as cited above has provided for the transfer of election results including the total number of the accredited voters from the polling unit.

"Section 62(2) on the other hand provides for compilation, maintenance and continuous update of the register of election results as a distinct database for all polling units' results as collated in all elections conducted by the commission.

"The said Section 62(2) has mandated that such a register of election results shall be kept in an electronic format by the commission at its national headquarters.

"Now a close reading of Section 50(2) has provided for voting and transmission of results to be done in accordance with the procedure to be determined by the commission.

"This is to say that the commission is at liberty to prescribe or choose the manner in which election results shall be transmitted."