Mbo State Constituency Tussle: Staff Indict INEC

BY NDON ASIAN

More revelations was made on Friday February 17, 2012 at the Election Petition Tribunal hearing national and state Assembly petitions in Uyo, as the Electoral Officer (EO) for Mbo, Mr. Friday Iweka, admitted under cross examination that the election result was fraudulent. Mr. Iweka who holds a B.Sc in local government management was the person saddled with the responsibility of distributing election materials to ad hoc and field staff, and ensuring the smooth conduct of the election generally. He testified as INEC only witness in petition No. EPT/AKS/HA/17/2011 which Ann Etim Eyo (Mrs.) accuses INEC of falsifying result to favour PDP.
Before the electoral officer for Mbo was allowed to testify after entering the dock, the court had to resolve the controversy surrounding one of his names. The petitioner’s counsel had drawn the attention of the tribunal to the fact that the witness deposition bore the name Sunday Iweka instead of Friday Iweka as given by INEC witness No. 1 in the dock. Mr. Iweka explained that the deposition is actually his own but that the name was incorrectly written as Sunday. The tribunal took arguments on both side and ruled that he should testify. He thereafter adopted his statement before being cross examined.
When asked about the conduct of the elections he said it was peaceful. He was further asked to tell the tribunal if he saw or had report of violence during the election, he retorted that “by the grace of God that was the most peaceful election I ever conducted”. But when counsel to the petitioner questioned about what led to the cancellation of elections in three wards in Mbo, Mr. Iweka narrated that after voting, thugs disrupted counting and snatched ballot boxes in wards 1, 2 and 8. As a result, he said there was nothing to record. Consequently, elections were cancelled in those areas. He confessed that there was incident of similar nature in ward 4 & 5.
Surprisingly, Mr. Friday Iweka said he did not know the name of the winner of Mbo State Constituency elections which he oversaw. He could not also ascertain that the result sheets were neither stamped nor dated. He denied collusion between the PDP and INEC, but admitted that some people reported to him in writing, with pictures of themselves in torn cloths. He told tribunal that these people complained of not being allowed to observe, vote or participate in the election.
In what turned out to be an example of the accusation of fraud by most voters, and candidates who lost the elections, Mr. Iweka, confessed that only five political parties fielded candidates for the State House of Assembly election. The parties were ACN, PDP, LP, CPC and NRD. However, he admitted in evidence that APGA, ARP, ANPP and PPA additionally took part.
Weekly Insight’s investigation in 2011 indicated that the violence and wholesale falsification which marked election in Mbo were reflected in the cancellation of election in some wards, and the final result declared and entered in Form EC8-IE. Form EC8-IE is the declaration of result sheet in which the final result is entered.
In that form two parties which did not sponsor any candidate to participate in the State House elections in Mbo, ANPP and ARP were included in the final result and allocated names of candidate and votes. While ANPP was given 447 votes and a candidate, ARP got 3 votes. As if that was not enough, these parties which fielded no candidates also signed the result sheets against the general practice that only parties which candidate participated should sign.
Form EC8-IE was shown to Mr. Iweka who identified it as the declaration of result sheet. INEC did not object to it as tribunal admitted same and marked it as Exhibit D. INEC’s manual for electoral officers was also admitted as exhibit.
In the same vein, the list of party candidates submitted by the Labour Party (LP) on which platform the petitioner contested the election was admitted by the tribunal after overruling objection by the petitioner’s counsel on ground that the one tendered is certified while the one attached to the respondent’s reply was not. On the other hand, the CD sought to be tendered by INEC through its witness was rejected by the tribunal on the basis of the petitioner’s objection. Mr. Iweka had said that he hired the service of a video cameraman to keep record of his activities from the office of the units but he neither mentioned it in his deposition nor was it pleaded in INEC’s reply. The case was adjourned to March 1, 2012 for adoption of addresses.