Connect with us

Opinion/Feature

Osun: BVAS And The Misconception About The Technology

Published

on

Just in: Adeleke defeats Oyetola in Osun governorship election

 

By Sarafa Ibrahim

 

Since his loss at the July 16 governorship election in Osun state, Alhaji Gboyega Oyetola and his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) have embarked on moves to challenge the integrity of the outcome and have the results announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) upturned.

 

They alleged before the Election Petition Tribunal that the election was marred by over-voting in 749 polling units and that the winner, Governor Ademola Adeleke, forged his certificate and was not qualified to participate in the election.

 

But has failed so far to establish any of the allegations raised before closing its case at the Tribunal. This must, however, be the reason for the fresh attempt to confuse the public by twisting the facts on Bimodial Voters Accreditation System (BVAS) in the latest article by Mr. Ismail Omipidan, the spokesman to Oyetola.

 

For the purpose of education, BVAS was an intervention by the electoral umpire to ensure that ballots cast in elections are actually valid and free of manipulation. Before its introduction, politicians easily abuse the use of incidence forms to award votes to themselves as there was no clear mechanism to validate that voters whose names appeared on the list were actually the ones who did cast the ballots ascribed to them.

 

With BVAS, only verified voters by the machine are allowed to vote, making it practically impossible for rigging elections. This was exactly what happened in the July 16 governorship election, which ended up producing Senator Ademola Adeleke as the winner of the poll after all ballots had been counted.

 

Now, to the question of over-voting raised by Oyetola and the APC. By law and logic, over-voting arises when the number of votes recorded in a polling unit exceeded the number of voters accredited in the said unit. But the basis of Oyetola and the APC claim rests on a BVAS report, which the INEC has dismissed as inaccurate.

 

According to the electoral umpire, the BVAS report being bandied around by Oyetola and the APC contained ‘incomplete and unsynchronized’ data, and so did not reflect the correct data of accreditations in the contested polling units. What this goes to suggest was that the claim of over-voting by the APC and Oyetola rests on faulty data, and that makes it unfounded.

 

A clear inference can be drawn from the inconsistencies that riddled the testimony of the two witnesses put forward by the APC and Oyetola at the Tribunal. In the first instance, Mr. Olanrewaju Isiaka, who was presented to the panel as a star witness by the petitioner’s counsel, conceded to the fact that the BVAS report is a secondary source of data.

 

What that admission clearly portrayed was that the data on a BVAS report must have come from a source, which in this case, was the BVAS machines. The BVAS machines were the device used at the various polling units to capture accreditation data and pass it on to the server in far away Abuja, where the BVAS report was generated from.

 

This simply implies that the BVAS machines are the primary source of data for accreditation and hold more weight in substantiating any claim of over-voting than the data that is sourced through a server. While I have no intention of dismissing the data on the server outrightly, the explanation of the INEC on the BVAS report in the possession of the APC is unambiguous and clear enough to understand.

 

For the benefit of those who may not know how these things work, the BVAS machines accredit voters and transmit the data to a central server of the INEC at its headquarters in Abuja. Mind you, the transmission is subject to the availability of the network, which the witness of the APC and Oyetola, acknowledged at the Tribunal, raising the likelihood of synchronization of the data at a point.

 

By synchronization, it means causing a set of files or data on one computer or device to be the same as on the other. In plain terms, making sure that the data on the BVAS machines are the same as the ones on the INEC server. That was exactly what the INEC did that the APC and Oyetola have tried endlessly to paint as unusual. In fact, it is something we experience regularly with our devices, making the hues of Oyetola and his party unnecessary.

 

You may have at a point received an incomplete message on your phone and after few hours or days, the broken part of the message is restored to your phone. What happened in the process that made the message complete as sent from the source is synchronization, which ensures that the message on your phone correspond with the message sent by the sender.

 

If the APC and Oyetola are convinced about their claim of over-voting, they have the BVAS machines readily available to prove it. Because unlike the data on the server, which is susceptible to hacking and network delays, the BVAS machines hold the primary data on every accreditation done for the election. By running away from it, and choosing a BVAS report that the maker of the document had openly dismissed as incorrect, showed the mischievous intent of APC and Oyetola to manipulate its way to power as it did in 2018.

 

This is why I find the question of Mr. Omipidan on why the INEC went ahead to announce the outcome of the July 16 governorship election when it is yet to synchronize the data on accreditation, funny. The position of the law on making a return for an election is very clear, and no part of either the Constitution or the Electoral Act supported his (Omipidan) position on the declaration of election results.

 

Section 62 of the Electoral Act, which faintly refers to server of a sort, centers on the Post-election procedure, meaning that whatever is contained in the server report, the BVAS machine itself, and the Form EC8A are the primary result platform. Even more, the section stipulates for the INEC to “MAINTAIN and UPDATE, on a continuous basis, a register of election results…” which goes to sanction the action of the electoral umpire to synchronize data on its server to make it consistent with what is on the BVAS machines.

 

Ibrahim Sarafa is a Public Affairs Analyst and writes from Osogbo, Osun state. He can be reached via his Twitter handle @SarafaNgr or email: neyoclass09@gmail.com

Opinion/Feature

Downstream Deregulation: Between Obasanjo’s Half-measures And Tinubu’s Bold Leadership

Published

on

By Temitope Ajayi
A video of former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s interview with News Central Television has been trending on social media platforms for the past week. In the interview, the former President, in a veiled reference to the current administration, said Nigeria has a President who came into office without a plan. Yet, the same ‘planless’ president is implementing a bold economic reform programme that Obasanjo initiated and abandoned mid-way.
This intervention is essentially about a tale of two leaders and how they both handled fuel subsidy removal, a very touchy issue every president of Nigeria has avoided since 1973 because of its disruptive nature and potential to precipitate a pushback that may lead to civil unrest. This serious matter in itself can make a difference between a bold and courageous leader from one that is pretentious and hesitant.
It is a fact of history that one of the things former President Obasanjo set out to do, among other reforms his administration embarked upon, was complete deregulation of the downstream oil industry. But hard as he tried, he failed to actualise it. Obasanjo faced so much opposition from organised labour and civil society groups that he abandoned a good policy that would have led to massive economic gains for the country. All he could muster the courage to do was to raise the pump price four times during his two-term tenure.
Twenty years after Obasanjo failed to implement complete downstream deregulation, President Bola Tinubu had the courage of his conviction to implement the policy, redirect the economy, and ensure efficiency in the management of public finance.
Despite his foibles and messianic complex, former President Obasanjo is no doubt a remarkable leader. His administration opened the economy and implemented essential reforms that his immediate successor should have continued with. What most critics find offensive about the former president is how he sees himself as the only saviour God created for Nigeria. As far as he is concerned, no other leader before and after him has been good enough. For context and clarity, it is essential to recall the former president’s position on deregulating the downstream oil sector when he was in charge.
In a national broadcast on October 8, 2003, President Obasanjo expressed his frustration and anger at the Nigeria Labour Congress for its opposition to the deregulation of the downstream sector to the point of accusing labour leaders of sedition thus:
“As you are aware, my government has embarked on fundamental reforms designed to depart from the waste and unproductive exercises of the past and leave lasting legacies for the prosperity and improved welfare and well-being of all Nigerians. Since 1999, we have gradually but steadily embarked on the programme of liberalisation and deregulation of the Nigerian economy to promote efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery. Most Nigerians and certainly all organised key stakeholders in the Nigerian economy, including the Nigeria Labour Congress, have endorsed the deregulation programme of government.
“It is a fitting symbol of our administration’s commitment to the welfare of workers and in an effort to cushion the effects of deregulation that the government provided 80 buses to the NLC in 2002. The transliner buses were delivered to the Congress for management without government interference. It is noteworthy that every step taken to deregulate the downstream oil sector has been dogged by, sometimes, irresponsible opposition by the Labour Congress. The result has been that we took too little steps to achieve no meaningful and satisfactory progress. We have tolerated all of these in the interest of promoting popular dialogue and informed dissent.
“Let me inform Nigerians that when government first came up with the deregulation programme, it was endorsed by the NLC and other stakeholders. In fact, the NLC had requested that we call it a “liberalisation” programme. It was thus more a matter of label than of substance. If we had been successful in implementing the deregulation or liberalisation of the downstream oil sector as earlier agreed by all stakeholders, including labour, we would not have been worrying about the periodic and unsatisfactory price-fixing which has led no where except to frustration. The failure to fully deregulate or liberalise has also cost Nigerians billions of naira which are currently wasted on millions of man-hours in queues at the petrol stations.
“The tens of billions of naira currently being lost in money that could have been used to increase capital spending in the universities, fund agriculture, repair and rehabilitate our roads, invest in education and health, improve security with extra police for security of lives and property.
“Realising that the investment of well over $400 million (excluding pipelines and depots) in the last six years mostly on Turn Around Maintenance (TAM) and repairs had not improved the performance of the refineries significantly, government had decided that it was unwise to put additional money into the repair of the Kaduna and Port Harcourt refineries before privatising them.
“What most Nigerians must know is that the contracts for the Turn Around Maintenance for the Kaduna and Port Harcourt refineries were awarded with 50% of the cost paid upfront before the advent of this administration in 1999. Allow me to add that two of the three refinery locations in the country today, were built by my administration as military head of state. This means that if for no other reason, I should be interested in keeping them working. Already, 18 private firms have been licensed to build refineries but they have been reluctant to go into the industry because of Government’s price control in the sector.
“If only 30% of these firms had been able to establish and operate private refineries, thousands of jobs would have been created and Nigeria would have been in a position to even export refined oil products. All these benefits and more have been denied to Nigerians by the stop-go approach to the deregulation or liberalisation programme, and only a few Nigerians are benefiting from the prevailing government-controlled system. In fact, the NLC’s approach has been counter-productive, and inflicted more pains on Nigerian workers. Each time there is a small increase of three naira or more, transporters have used the opportunity to jerk up transportation cost thereby making the ordinary worker poorer.
“A once-and-for-all total deregulation would have meant a once-and-for-all increase in transport cost and the pump price for petroleum products. Without a doubt, a once-and-for-all total deregulation would have resolved the problem of availability and thus bring down prices for those outside Abuja, Lagos, Port Harcourt and their environs who have always paid much more than the official posted price. Pump prices arising from the present total deregulation would, in reality, amount to a reduction in prices of majority of Nigerians.”
Interestingly, excerpts from the 2003 national broadcast by President Obasanjo present a contrast between the former leader and President Tinubu. They also showcase two leadership visions. One leader saw the need to fight for the country’s long-term sustainability but chickened out because he lacked the courage to upset the status quo. Two decades later, another leader saw the damage the failure to make the right economic decision had caused the country. He decided to correct it to avert a looming calamity. While former President Obasanjo left the most challenging task of his presidency undone, President Tinubu tackled head-on what has become an existential threat to our collective well-being from his first day in office. He has remained focused on the bigger picture.
President Tinubu recognises the burden of leadership and responsibility he bears on behalf of Nigerians. In discharging this burden, he knew from day one that he would have to make the right but unpopular decisions that would ultimately serve the best interest of the country and her people.
It is certainly not correct to say this president came to the office without a plan. President Tinubu came into the office with a clear plan titled “Renewed Hope 2023: Action Plan for a Better Nigeria.” It was a well-thought-out programme, with which he canvassed for votes across the country and was elected by our people.
In the past 17 months, he has remained faithful to the document as he implements the distilled eight-point agenda.
At the heart of President Tinubu’s economic revitalisation is gas development and expansion of gas pipeline infrastructure to enable Nigeria to compete with Russia in the European markets. In fairness to him, former President Obasanjo himself recently lamented he did not pay adequate attention to gas during his term of office.
Expanding the pool of available talents and human capital through granting of loans to young Nigerians who are the future of the country to enable them acquire tertiary or vocational education is part of the plans that propelled Tinubu into office. Consumer credit initiative that will promote local production and further stimulate the economy is also high on Tinubu’s action plan. To the President’s credit, these two important policy initiatives among several others are being implemented through NELFUND and Nigerian Consumer Credit Corporation (CrediCorp).
If there is one President of Nigeria that came prepared and well armed with a clear cut plan to reposition the country across sectors for better outcomes, that President, undoubtedly, is President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
-Ajayi is Senior Special Assistant to President Tinubu on Media and Publicity
Continue Reading

Opinion/Feature

UNCOMMON SCHOLAR, EXCEPTIONAL ADMINISTRATOR: MY TRIBUTE TO PROF. OLOYEDE AT 70

Published

on

 

By President Bola Tinubu

As Professor Ishaq Oloyede turns 70 tomorrow, October 10, I pay a special tribute to this astute administrator, educator, author, and scholar, currently the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) Registrar.

As the former Vice Chancellor of the University of Ilorin, Prof. Oloyede’s invaluable contributions to the nation through academia and public-sector administration have significantly impacted the academic community.

ALSO READ: Tinubu Congratulates Zainab Shinkafi-Bagudu On Her Election As President, UICC

His impactful tenure at the University of Ilorin, during which he introduced landmark ideas and innovations that helped the institution attain enviable heights, is on record.

Through patriotic dedication and commitment to his craft, Prof Oloyede imparted knowledge and character to thousands of students who underwent his teaching during his glorious and impactful academic career.

Indeed, the bedrock of development lies in education. Developing nations, including Nigeria, are in dire need of more scholars like Prof. Oloyede. His selfless sacrifices and innovative approaches to learning and leadership give hope for a brighter future.

Perhaps more remarkable is Prof. Oloyede’s transformative leadership at JAMB. He pioneered and sustained a series of reforms and technological innovations that have made the admission process in Nigeria transparent and credible.

In his eight years of stewardship at the board, thus far, Prof. Oloyede has demonstrated an uncommon commitment to financial integrity and accountability in public service. He has also raised the bar in administration and management.

I am proud of Prof. Oloyede’s accomplishments.

The nation owes the Professor of Islamic Jurisprudence a debt of gratitude for transforming JAMB, traditionally a non-revenue-generating government agency, into a consistent contributor to the national treasury through efficient financial management. His contributions to JAMB are invaluable and greatly appreciated.

On this occasion of his 70th birthday, I join members of the academic community, students, JAMB staff, and well-wishers in celebrating this scholar who, in words and deeds, has also done a lot to propagate the Islamic religion.

I pray that Almighty Allah will continue to honour the distinguished professor with health, wisdom and strength to serve the nation for many more years.

Continue Reading

Opinion/Feature

Clarification On NNPCL Refinery Operations

Published

on

 

By Sen. Heineken Lokpobiri PhD

My attention has been drawn to statements made by Engr. Kamoru Busari, Director of Upstream in the Ministry of Petroleum Resources, who represented me at a recent conference in Lagos. I wish to categorically state that the claim that I directed the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) to stop running its own refineries and focus solely on equity participation in other refineries is false. This does not represent my position as Minister overseeing the oil sector, nor does it reflect the stance of the Federal Government.

It is important to clarify that NNPCL is a company governed under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), with a functional board and management. The Ministry of Petroleum Resources does not control or run NNPCL, as it operates independently like any corporate entity.

ALSO READ: NNPC/Seplat JV’s “Eye Can See” Programme Restores Vision, Hope In Imo

The oil and gas sector is fully deregulated, and the Nigerian government remains committed to promoting in-country refining. We encourage companies, including NNPCL, to operate independently, following global best practices. While we provide strategic guidance, we do not interfere directly in the operations of these companies.

I reaffirm our commitment to supporting the growth and independence of NNPCL, ensuring that its operations are in line with international standards for efficiency and transparency and profitability.

Sen. Heineken Lokpobiri PhD, Minister of State Petroleum Resources (Oil), wrote from Abuja, Nigeria

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2022. Biztellers, powered by Alphaxristi.