Presidential poll: I scored over 18.3m votes against Buhari's 16.7m – Atiku Press "Enter" to skip to content

Presidential poll: I scored over 18.3m votes against Buhari’s 16.7m – Atiku

…Ex-VP, PDP hallucinating, suffering post-election depression, says APC

…PDP drags Inyang to NJC for halting Bauchi result collation

Andrew Orolua, Tom Okpe & Tunde Opalana, Abuja

The Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has said that the actual total votes he scored at the February 23, 2019 presidential election was 18, 356,732 votes against President Muhammadu Buhari’s 16,741,430 votes.

In the election petition he filed on Monday at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal in Abuja, Atiku claimed that he won the February 23 presidential election.

In the petition, Atiku claimed that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the organiser of the said election, deliberately ignored the actual figures scored by the political parties and manipulated the figures and announced 11,262,978 votes for the PDP candidate, Atiku Abubakar, and announced 15,191,847 votes for All Progressives Congress (APC)’s Muhammadu Buhari.

Atiku said that the actual total votes he scored in Abia State was 664,659 votes to Buhari 198,391 votes. In Adamawa State, he got 646,080 votes and Buhari 169,600 votes and in Akwa Ibom State that he scored 587,431 votes and Buhari 337,939 votes.

In Anambra State, Atiku said he scored 823,668 votes while Buhari got 333,710 votes. In Bauchi State, he scored 187,668 votes and Buhari 854,037 votes. In Bayelsa State, Atiku said he had 332,618 votes and Buhari 133,646 votes. In Benue State, Atiku said he scored 529,970 votes and Buhari 140,282 votes.

In Borno State, Atiku said he got 281,897 votes and Buhari 849,599 votes. In Cross River, he scored 572,970 votes and Buhari 118,670 votes while in Delta State, he scored 778,369 votes and Buhari 99,203 votes.

In Ebonyi State, Atiku said he got 565,762 votes and Buhari 291,846 votes. In Edo State, he said he had a total of 677,937 votes to Buhari’s 534,844 votes while in Ekiti State, he got 154,032 votes and Buhari 219,231 votes.

In Enugu State, he said he scored 698,119 votes while Buhari had 267,821 votes. In FCT, Atiku said he scored 419,724 votes while Buhari got 366,427 votes. In Gombe State, he said he got 684,077 votes to Buhari’s 115,225 votes while in Imo State, he scored 485,627 votes and Buhari got 423,801 votes.

In Jigawa State, Atiku said he got 539,522 votes and Buhari 545,231 votes while in Kaduna State, he scored 961,143 votes and Buhari 469,002 votes. In Kano State, Atiku said he got 522,889 votes and Buhari 1,545,251 votes while in Katsina State, he scored 160,203 votes to Buhari’s 1,555,633 votes.

Atiku further claimed that in Kebbi State, he had 493,341 votes to Buhari’s 581,115 votes. In Kogi State, Atiku said he got 504,308 votes to Buhari’s 431,479 votes while in Kwara State, he scored 353,173 votes and Buhari got 379,643.

In Lagos State, the former vice president said he got 1,103,297 votes while Buhari garnered 1,422,906 votes. In Nasarawa State, Atiku said he scored 344,421 votes and Buhari 382,270 votes while in Niger State, he got 576,308 votes to Buhari’s 504,218 votes. In Ogun State, Atiku said he scored 438,099 votes while Buhari got 482,099.

In Ondo State, Atiku said he got 451,779 voted while Buhari scored 366,436 votes. In Osun State, Atiku said he got 337,359 and Buhari 347,674 votes while in Oyo State, he got 527,873 voted to Buhari’s 472,735 votes.

In Plateau State, Atiku said he got 273,031 votes and Buhari 148,268 votes while in Rivers State, there was no result on the server.

In Sokoto State, Atiku said he got 552,172 votes and Buhari 617,131 votes while in Taraba State, he got 442,380 votes and Buhari scored 188,389 votes. In Yobe State, Atiku said he garnered 306,841 voted while Buhari had 443,904 votes while in Zamfara State, he polled 379,022 votes and Buhari got 413,774 votes.

According to him, he polled a total of 18,356,732 votes while Buhari had 16,741,430 votes.

The petitioners (Atiku and the PDP) had joined the Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC), each and every person who acted as Presiding Officers, Assistant Presiding Officers, Supervisory Presiding Officers, ad hoc Staff in all the polling units/stations/points, Ward Collation Officers in all the Ward Collation Centres, Local Government Collation Officers in all the Local Government Area Collation Centres, all the State Collation Officers in all the State Collation Centres, the Resident Electoral Commissioners, the Chief Returning Officer, and any other person who acted in one capacity or the other on behalf of the 1st Respondent at the aforesaid election, acted as the 1st Respondent.

Also joined as the 2nd Respondent is Muhammadu Buhari who was the candidate in the said Presidential Election of 23rd February 2019 and contested under the platform of the 3rd Respondent -All Progressives Congress (APC).

The Petitioners stated that the election to the office of President of Nigeria took place on Saturday, 23rd February 2019, having been postponed from the earlier scheduled date of 16th February 2019.

Four days after the election, specifically on Wednesday 27th February 2019, the 1st Respondent announced and declared Muhammadu Buhari of the APC winner of the poll.

The Petitioners said they plead and shall rely on Form EC8D(A) (being the summary of collation of results) and Form EC8E series (being the declaration of result) issued by the 1st Respondent, not only to show the recorded scores but to show the invalidity of the scores as recorded thereon.

It is further pleaded that on the face of Form EC8D (A), there are calculation errors as shown and contained in the Report of the Statisticians which the Petitioners rely upon, as herein pleaded.

“The Petitioners plead and shall also rely on the Reports and evidence by their Experts, including Statisticians, Forensic Examiners and other Experts pursuant to the Orders for inspection and production of election materials granted to the Petitioners by this Honourable Court.

“The Petitioners state that the Grounds upon which this Petition is based are as follows: The 2nd Respondent was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election; The election of the 2nd Respondent is invalid by reason of corrupt practices;

The election of the 2nd Respondent is invalid by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended); The 2nd Respondent was at the time of the election not qualified to contest the said election;

The 2nd Respondent submitted to the 1st Respondent an affidavit containing false information of a fundamental nature in aid of his qualification for the said election”.

According to the petitioners, the fact of the petition is that Buhari was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election and did not score one-quarter of the lawful votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the States in the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.

The Petitioners stated that contrary to the result declared by the 1st Respondent, it was the 1st Petitioner who indeed won majority of lawful votes cast and satisfied the mandatory constitutional threshold and spread across the Federation and ought to have been declared winner and returned as duly elected President of Nigeria at the said election to the office of President which held on 23rd February 2019.

“The 1st Respondent wrongly and unlawfully credited the 2nd Respondent with votes which were not valid or lawful votes at various stages of the election, namely, at the polling units, the ward collating centres, local government collating centres and the State collating centres, with the result that the 2nd Respondent was wrongly returned when the said 2nd Respondent did not score majority of lawful votes.

“The Petitioners shall lead oral and documentary evidence at the trial to show that the results of the election as announced by the 1st Respondent and especially the votes credited to the 2nd Respondent do not represent the lawful valid votes cast. Lawful votes were deducted from the 1st Petitioner’s scores by the 1st Respondent in order to return the 2nd Respondent.

“The Petitioners shall also call evidence of statisticians, forensic examiners and finger-print experts at the hearing of the Petition to establish that the scores credited the 2nd Respondent were not the product of actual votes validly cast at the polling units.

The Petitioners plead and shall rely on electronic video recordings, newspaper reports, photographs and photographic images of several infractions of the electoral process by the Respondents.

“The Petitioners plead, state and contend that from the data in the 1st Respondent’s Server, as between the 1st Petitioner and the 2nd Respondent, the true, actual and correct results upon a State to State computation are as reflected under the scores of the 1st Petitioner and the 2nd Respondent, hereunder in the Table following:

“The Petitioners shall rely on the evidence of Statisticians, Forensic Examiners and other Experts, detailing the data analysis on the votes at all levels of collation, from the polling units to the final return”.

The Petitioners stated that Smart Card Readers deployed by the 1st Respondent, in addition to accreditation, equally transmitted electronically the results of voting from polling units directly to the server of the 1st Respondent.

The Presiding Officers of the 1st Respondent directly inputted the results from the polling units at the end of voting and transmitted directly to the server, in addition to manually taking the Form EC8As to the Wards for collation.

The 1st “Respondent is hereby given notice to produce the records of results from each polling unit uploaded and transmitted electronically by officials of the 1st Respondent through smart card readers to the 1st Respondent’s Servers,” the PDP and the former Vice President stated in their petition.

Reacting to the claims, the All Progressives Congress (APC) declared that the Presidential Candidate of the PDP, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar’s and his party are into post- election depression and hallucination.

Atiku had claimed he won the Presidential Election with 1.6 million votes ahead of the acclaimed winner, President Muhammadu Buhari of the APC as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The 2019 general election was also described as free, fair and credible by both International and Local Observers.

The APC through its spokesman, Mallam Lanre Issah- Onilu, told journalists in Abuja on Wednesday said: “After weeks of dilly-dallying, the PDP has woken up to the stark reality of its electoral defeat and decided to follow the constitutional path of filing a petition at the Election Tribunal.

However, of all the prayers of Atiku before the Election Tribunal, which are at best hollow, the most ridiculous is his claim that the server of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) indicated he ‘won’ the Presidential Election by 1.6million votes”.

The APC said vast majority of Nigerians reaffirmed their unshaken belief in President Muhammadu Buhari to continue to steer the affairs of the country for another four years stating, “we have watched in disbelief and utter amusement how the PDP and its Presidential Candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, have engaged in series of circus shows to cheer up their crestfallen and disillusioned members.

“While the APC is not oblivious of the PDP’s antics to discredit the credible presidential electoral process, acknowledged by local and international observers, we sympathise with Atiku for the crushing defeat handed him by President Buhari through the votes of Nigerians.

“Judging by Atiku and PDP’s recent utterances and actions, it is now clear that they have slipped into severe depression and post-defeat hallucination that have left many Nigerians questioning their current state of mind.

“A few questions would suffice: Is this phantom figure of 1.6 million votes Dubai-invented? Was the result sold to Atiku by his numerous marabouts, who we understand, had assured him that the last election was a done deal for him?

“Most importantly, we note Atiku’s consistent reference to the “INEC server” as if he is the custodian of that platform. Indeed, Atiku’s constant reference to the INEC server should raise concern as it is becoming apparent that he and the PDP are up for some dastard activities that are targeted at jeopardising the INEC database and internal storage system.

We recall the widespread reported cases of several programmed card readers that were retrieved from some PDP agents and their failed attempt to hack the INEC database in the lead-up to the then postponed presidential election”.

The ruling party reminded Atiku and PDP that Nigerians saw through the devious schemes aimed at thwarting their will. Consequently, majority of the voters handed them a harsh verdict remains sacrosanct.

“We call on INEC and the security agencies to be on red alert to ensure that Atiku and the other desperate characters in the PDP are not able to execute their evil plans”, Onilu said.

In a related development, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has petitioned the National Judicial Council over the violation of the Constitution and Electoral Act by Justice Ekwo Inyang of the Federal High Court by sitting on a matter that ought to have been handled by an election petition tribunal, as created by the provisions of our laws.

The party noted that in granting an ex-parte order stopping the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from concluding the governorship election in Bauchi State, Justice Inyang violated Section 87(11) of the Electoral Act, which states that no court has the power or jurisdiction to stop any election pending the determination of a suit.

In an affidavit sworn to by the PDP’s National Chairman, Prince Uche Secondus, in Abuja, the party noted that issues of collation of results and declaration of winner, is a post-election event and, therefore, falls under the Electoral Act and Constitutional provisions for the election petition tribunal.

The affidavit states: “Despite this clear provision of the law, Justice Ekwo decided to hear the application of Alhaji Mohammed Abubakar and his political party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), within 24 hours on 19th March, 2019 and issued an order on INEC not to continue with the election until the case before him is finally decided.

“That the collation of results is a post-election event and under section 87(11) of the Electoral Act, no court has the power or jurisdiction to stop any election pending the determination of a suit.

“That an election includes voting, collation of results and the declaration of results.

“That as a result of the order on the Independent National Electoral Commission, the conclusion of the Bauchi State Governorship election which was to take place on 19th March 2019 was stalled.

“That the order of Justice Ekwo was made contrary to the provisions of the Constitution of Nigeria, 1999 as amended dealing without fair hearing and also section 87(11) of the Electoral Act.

“That the Chief Justice of Nigeria has constituted the various Election Petition Tribunals in Nigeria to handle such cases and the assumption of jurisdiction by Justice Inyang Ekwo is an affront to the constitution and electoral wishes of the people of Tafawa Balewa Local Government Area and Bauchi State”.

The PDP insisted that not only did Justice Inyang violate the clear provisions of the Electoral Act, the motion granted is also an affront to the electoral wishes of the people of Bauchi State who have clearly chosen their next governor in voting for the PDP’s candidate, Sen. Bala Mohammed.

The PDP urged the NJC to save our democracy by taking an urgent step against the violations by Justice Inyang.

shares