A suit filed by the Labour Party (LP) which sought to oblige the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to accept the electronic method in transmitting 2023 election results has been struck out by Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The Judge ruled that Section 52(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022, cited by the party’s counsel, Monday Mawah, provided for voting and transmission of results in accordance with the INEC-determined procedure.
According to the Judge, the commission is free to recommend or select the manner in which election results shall be transmitted.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) obtained a copy of the judgment delivered by Justice Nwite on January 23, prior to the presidential and National Assembly elections on February 25.
According to the agency LP, through its lawyer, had, on Aug 22, 2022, filed the originating summons marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1454/2022 to sue INEC as the sole respondent.
The party requested the court to rule on whether, in light of the combined effect of Sections 47 (2), 50 (2), 60(4), 60 (5), and 62 (1)(2) of the Electoral Act of 2022, the commission can still emphasize on manual collation of results in general polls.
In the event that the question was decided in its favor, the LP sought two injunctive reliefs in the suit.
They are: “A declaration that the respondent has no power to opt for a manual method other than the electronic method provided for by the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.
“An order of this honourable court directing/compelling the respondent to comply with the Electoral Act, 2022 on electronic transmission of results in the forthcoming general elections. ”
Nevertheless, INEC did not respond to the suit and did not file any processes.
Mawah argued that under the provisions of the law, the manual collation of results was not known to the Electoral Act of 2022 and thus had to be ignored or nullified by the court.
Justice Nwite while delivering judgment said: “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,” citing a previous case to back his ruling.
He added that the functions, roles, and duties of the court in clarification of the statute are to give meaning and effect to clear and unambiguous words of the statute.
According Nwite, the bone of contention or the sections sought for interpretation were Sections 50(2), 60(5), and 62(2) of the Electoral Act of 2022.
He pointed out that Section 47(2), as referenced by the lawyer, only treated voter accreditation using a Smart Card Reader, not the collation or transmission of results, as he proposed.
“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 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 result 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,” he said. Nwite also held that Section 60(5) authorized the presiding officer of the polling unit to transfer the election results, as well as the total number of accredited voters and ballot results, in the procedure provided by INEC and therefore, dismissed the suit.