Oseyili Anenih, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) witness on Tuesday testified before the Edo State election petition tribunal in Abuja, stating that there was irregularities widespread irregularities in 765 polling units during the 21 September 2024 Edo governorship election.
Oseyili Anenih, who appeared as Petitioner Witness 12 (PW12), testified that discrepancies were found in the election documents when compared with certified true copies of results and BVAS (Bimodal Voter Accreditation System) accreditation reports obtained from INEC’s IREV portal.
However, he clarified that none of the irregularities were documented by him personally.
16.7 per cent of Polling Units Allegedly Affected
Under cross-examination by Kanu Agabi, counsel for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr Anenih agreed that the affected 765 polling units represented 16.7 per cent of the 4,519 polling units in Edo State.
He noted that these irregularities were documented in his witness statement on oath, which he urged the tribunal to adopt as evidence.
Reports of Infractions and Examination of Documents
When asked by Mr Agabi if he was aware that 18 political parties participated in the election, Mr Anenih alleged infractions in 320 polling units.
He explained that the infractions were reported to him by party agents and election experts through oral and written submissions.
“I personally examined the materials and other documents used during the election,” he said.
He argued that if all uncounted votes were considered, the PDP candidate, Asue Ighadolo, would have emerged victorious.
BVAS Data Discrepancies
Responding to cross-examination by Onyechi Ikpeazu, counsel for the third respondent, Mr Anenih admitted that the BVAS machine was crucial in the election but stated that he had no physical access to it. Instead, he relied on data extracted from BVAS machines, which was presented as screenshots.
Did
Mr Ikpeazu challenged the authenticity of the data, pointing out that the certified true copies were obtained on 8 January 2025, while the data extraction occurred on 21 November 2024. He noted that polling unit agents are expected to reconcile results to ensure consistency with BVAS entries.
Disruption and Missing Results
Emmanuel Ukala, counsel for the second respondent, asked Mr Anenih if he personally received copies of election results from agents.
Mr Anenih responded that he did not receive the results directly due to disruptions during the election. However, he said some results eventually made their way into the collation room.
Mr Anenih acknowledged that some agents’ copies of results were illegible and were therefore excluded from the petition.
He also admitted that while some results were signed by party agents, others were unsigned.
When asked if any of the results he relied on were not utilised during the collation process, Mr Anenih stated, “None.”
Adjournment Due to Witness Absence
Counsel for the PDP, Adetunji Oyeyipo, SAN, informed the tribunal that some of the party’s witnesses could not testify due to travel disruptions. He sought the indulgence of the tribunal to present additional witnesses at the next sitting.
The tribunal chairperson, Wilfred Kpochi, acknowledged the disruption and adjourned the hearing to Wednesday, 30 January 2025, for the continuation of proceedings.