How Voters Disappeared in Ekiti Between 2007 and 2009 – and the Ido-Osi Archive

No Comments » May 13th, 2009 posted by // Categories: Elections 2007



 

 

 

 

OPERATION-PROTECT-YOUR-EKITI-VOTE #30: How Voters Disappeared in Ekiti Between 2007 and 2009 – and the Ido-Osi Archive

 

 

May 13, 2009

 

 

Dear All:

 

There are 16 local governments, 177 wards and 2,195 polling units involved in Ekiti  State gubernatorial elections.  Following legal challenges of the April 2007 elections, the Appeal Court reduced the the problem to 10 local governments, 63 wards and 794 polling units, annulled the gubernatorial elections, and called for re-runs, with which were then engaged on April 25 and May 5, 2009. 

 

We now have INEC results for both sets of elections.  The table below – notwithstanding the challenge against the Ido-Osi results of 2009 – compares both, showing

 

– a vanishing of a total of almost 67,000 votes for the PDP between 2007 and 2009;

– and in greater detail, of that total, a vanishing of about 16,000 votes in Ido-Osi LGA, 14,000 votes in Oye LGA, 12,000 votes in Irepodun/Ifelodun LGA, 10,000 votes in Ikole and 6,500 votes in Gbonyin LGA; that is a total of about 58,500 votes (almost 90% of total) from

just five local governments out of sixteen.

 

There can be no greater prima-facie proof of “mago-mago” (electoral rigging) than these revelations, which of course the Appeal Court had ruled about on February 17, 2009.

 

But have any lessons been learnt?  Apparently not by the PDP in Ido-Osi, where, following the Table below, we provide excerpts of Fayemi’s Petition in Ido-Osi with respect to the April 2007 elections.  Particularly in the four wards of Ifaki I & II, Usi and Orin/Ora, the same things that occurred in April 2007 were repeated in April 2009, with inventiveness sometimes imported from other wards. 

 

For example, in April 2007:

 

QUOTE

 

IFAKI WARD II

     
      viii.     At Agbaludi Polling UnIt In lfaki Ward II where the Action Congress Senatorial Candidate, Mr. Olu Adetunmbl
             registered and went with a view to cast his vote at 11.00am holding his Voter’s Card No. Ekiti/08/04/002 and showing
             same to the agents of the 2nd Respondent he was told to  his shock and utter dismay that election had closed and
             that his name had already been ticked on the register as having voted and thus was brazeniy
             disenfranchised……..

 

OSI WARD
 
        xiii.     In all, there are 12 Polling Units in this Ward in respect of which agents of the 2nd. 3rd and 8th Respondents purportedly
             acted as Presiding Officers without actually being physically present thereat. Nevertheless, by sheer human “ingenuity”
             which will make the Heavens weep, they produced or manufactured results in the form of INEC Form EC.8A. A
             common thread which runs through or pervades the entire Form EC.8A in this Ward is that not a single agent, including
             that of the PDP on whose platform the 1st Respondent contested, signed or endorsed the said Forms.

 

UNQUOTE

 

 

Enjoy the information below….the same fate awaits before the courts.

 

 

KF Campaign

 

 

 

TABLE A: COMPARING 2007 TO 2009 RESULTS FOR EKITI GUBERNATORIAL ELECTIONS

S/N

LGA

(#Wards and #Polling Units)

Hqtrs

AC/FAYEMI

April/May 2009

PDP/ONI

 

April/May 2009

AC/FAYEMI

PDP/ONI

 

April 2007

COMMENT

 

F(ayemi) =, O(ni)

= difference (2009 – 2007)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Ado (13 wards, 207 PUs)

Ado

16,612

9,700

16,612

9,700

F = 0; O = 0;  no rerun

2

Moba (11 wards, 112 PUs)

Otun

8,364

7,792

8,364

7,792

F = 0; O = 0;  no rerun

3

Ilejemeje (10 wards, 91 PUs)

Iye

2,122

3,405

2,122

3,405

F = 0; O = 0;  no rerun

4

Ikere (11 wards, 86 PUs)

Ikere

6,971

6,214

6,971

6,214

F = 0; O = 0;  no rerun

5

Emure (10 wards, 93 PUs)

Emure

3,645

2,925

3,645

2,925

F = 0; O = 0;  no rerun

6

Efon (10 wards, 119 PUs)

Efon-Alaaye

0

0

0

0

F = 0; O = 0;  no rerun

7

Ise-Orun (10 wards, 108 PUs)

Ise

4,221

3,864

2,974

4,744

F = 1,247, O = -880

8

Gbonyin (10 wards, 103 PUs)

Ode

5,962

5,975

6,224

12,426

F = -262,   O = -6,451

9

Ekiti-SouthWest (11 wards, 188 PUs)

Ilawe

7,106

7,556

6,907

8,767

F = 199,    O = -1,211

10

Ijero (12 wards, 138 PUs)

Ijero

5,359

9,110

6,882

13,241

F = -1,523 O = -4,131

11

Irepodun/Ifelodun (11 wards, 160 PUs)

Igede

9,926

5,665

9,900

17,598

F = 26,       O = -11,933

12

Ekiti West (11 wards, 184 PUs)

Aramoko

7,617

8,671

6,733

7,210

F = 884,     O = 1,461

13

Ekiti East (12 wards, 95 PUs)

Omuo

7,829

8,717

9,448

11,243

F = -1,619 O = -2,526

14

Ikole (12 wards, 182 PUs)

Ikole

6,153

6,861

6,233

17,210

F = -80,      O = -10,349

15

Oye (12 wards, 190 PUs)

Oye

11,337

8,746

10,917

23,005

F = 420,     O = -14,259

 

Sub-Total (166 wards, 2,056 PUs)

 

F = -708,    O =  -50,279

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16

Ido-Osi (11 wards, 139 PUs)

Ido

3,793

15,939

4,373

32,300

F = -580,     O = -16,361

Contested Result

 

GRAND-TOTAL (177 Wards, 2,195 PUs)

 

108,305

177,780

F = -1,288   O = -66,640

Contested  Result

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 EXCERPT FROM KAYODE FAYEMI/AC PETITION  OF APRIL 2007 ELECTIONS BEFORE THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL

 

 

See: http://www.kayodefayemi.com/documents/Fayemi_Ekiti_Petition.pdf   , Pages 10-16

 

 

QUOTE

             GROUNDS AND FACTS UPON WHICH THE PETITION IS BASED
        
         37. Your Petitioner states that:
        
               I.  The 1st Respondent was not duly elected by a majority of the lawful votes cast at the election;
        
               II. The election and return of the lst Respondent Is invalid by reasons of electoral malpractlces and non-compliance
                   with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2006         
         
         38. Your Petitioner states that he scored a majority of lawful votes cast at the election and, therefore, ought to have been returned
             as the winner by the 2nd and/or 3rd Respondent.
        
         39. Your Petitioner further states that the declaration made on 15th April, 2007 by the 2nd Respondent, through the 3rd Respondent
             that the 1st Respondent won the said election and thereby returned him as elected is a clear violation of the provisions of the
             Electoral Act, 2006 because the 1st Respondent did not score a majority of lawful votes cast and that in the Local Government
             Areas where elections did not take place or were clearly and brazenly manipulated by the 2nd-14th Respondents, assisted by the
             15th – 16th Respondents, votes were credited or allocated to the 1st Respondent in a manner that suits their whims and caprices
             and in brazen and flagrant violation of the provisions of Electoral Act 2006. Your Petitioner hereunder captures or catalogues the
             true and proper account of what took place or transpired in the affected Local Government Areas of the State.
        
         A.  IDO-OSI LOCAL GOVERNMENT

         40. Your Petitioner states that no election or actual voting took place in the entire Local Government Area as voters who had thronged
             the Polling Centres were prevented by agents of the 1st Respondent from voting. They were scared away by the 1st
             Respondent’s hired thugs who shot sporadically into the air. Apart from these thugs, other stern-looking, gun-totting officers of the
             15th and 17th Respondents also joined in the shameful act of massive thumb printing of ballot papers in favour of the 1st
             Respondent. Your Petitioner will lead evidence to show that the lst, 2nd and 8th Respondents merely and arbitrarily allocated or
             credited votes to the political parties and their candidates. In the process, the 1st,  2nd and 8th Respondents and their agents
             surreptitiously and unjustly favoured the 1st Respondent with more votes than the Petitioner, relying on the unlawful/illegal ballot
             papers stuffed into ballot boxes by the agents of the 1st Respondent, assisted by the 3rd, 8th. 15th, 16th and 17th
             Respondents.
        
         41. Agents of the Petitioner as well as Other registered voters waited from 8.00am till about 5.30pm for officers of  the  2nd          Respondent who were to come with election materials to conduct the election. As no election material(s) was/were brought to most
             polling units for real or octual voting, the agents of the Petitioner left the various polling stations – ditto the electorates.
        
         42. Your Petitioner states that the results for all the 139 PollIng units and eleven (11) Wards in the entire Local Government were
             manufactured, configured or conjured in favour of and to the advantage of the 1st Respondent by the 2nd, 3rd and 8th
             Respondents and their officers/agents who secretly filled or prepared Form EC.8A in respect of all the Polling Units in the Local
             Government. In doing so, the said officers of the 1st Respondent threw all known decency and caution into the air by recklessly
             and brazenly filling the said Form EC.8A in a manner that even  Heavens would disapprove of.
        
         43. Your Petitioner states that in most of the Forms EC.8A which were   arbitrarily and unilaterally filled by officers of the 2nd Respondent, the number of ballot papers issued to the polling stations in the Local Government far out-numbered the number of registered
             voters in each or all the units.  Similarly, the sum total of valid votes, rejected ballots, spoilt and unused ballots is far in excess of the number of ballot papers issued to the polling stations.  Worst still is the fact that in most or all of the said Forms EC..8A, the Presiding
             Officers who purportedly presided over at the polling units fill the said forms and at the same time acted as or transmuted to
              be the agents of the political parties which were listed in the said forms.  In other words, the purported Presiding Officers who filled
              Forms EC.8A and indiscriminately allocated scores or votes to parties also acted as and signed for the agents of the political
              parties.
        

         ILOGBO WARD

        i.  In INEC Form EC.8A (No. 125901) purportedly returned for Ileogunire Odofin Abasa Polling Unit, a fictitious and non-
             existing polling agent for AC was conjured up and as signature purportedly belonging to the said agent was
             drawn or carved against his name. A common handwriting runs through the Form.
        
        ii.  One “Akuma A. Anthony” purportedly presented himself as the Presiding Officer for IIe Elepe Olua, near AJayi’s House
             Polling Station, Code 002. In the Form EC.8A which the said Akuma A. Anthony filled the ballot papers issued were far in
             excess of the number of registered voters. Whereas, 69  people were registered by the 2nd Respondent for election
             in this unit, 100 ballot papers were supplied to the Unit.  Similarly, 68 used ballot papers were recorded and all 68
             papers were regarded as valid votes, yet, it is recorded in the Form EC.8A for the unit that there were 68 unused ballot
             papers. Now, an addition of the 68 used and 68 unused ballot papers will make a totai of 136 ballot papers which
             figure is undoubtedIy in excess of the 100 ballot paper issued to this Polling Unit or Station.

       iii.  In Ogbegun Alao with Code 003, only four (4) poiitical  parties, that is, AC, PDP, ANPP, LP were featured in the Form
         EC.8A which was secretly filled by one “Oguntuase Tope” as the Presiding Officer.
        
         iv. On the face of the questionable Polling Units result for  Odode Ile-Eyebutun I, Code 004, it was recorded by the
             purported Presiding Offlcer that oniy 5 ballot papers were  issued, yet a staggering 100 ballot papers were issued out to
             registered voters by the Presiding Officer out of which 99 were regarded as valid votes leaving out 1 as rejected
             vote. Again, at this unit as with many others, only five (5) political parties, PDP, AC, ANPP, LP and DPA, were listed.
             Your Petitioner contends that there was the handwriting and signature of Aina Sunday appearing on the result sheet
             for the unit as his agent are not those of Aina Sunday.
        
         v.  In ldo Ide lleyebutun Code 005. the Form EC8A for this polling unit was purportedly signed by one Caleb Hozea
             who was described as the Presiding Officer
     
       USI WARD

         vi. In the result returned for Oke Ijeba polling unit, Code 010, the hand writing reflected in the entries as to the scores of
             the various parties is strikingly different from that used in writing the name of the presiding officer on Form ECBA used
             of this unit.
        
             Again, the signature of the agent for AC, ANPP, NPP and PDP are suspiciously not dissimilar.
        
         vii. The same anathemas or discrepancies/irregularities/ mutilation/manipulations are noticeable in the Form ECSA
             for Oke Odi FSTC (Cod. 006), Oke Odi Upper Gate 3 (Code 007), Usi High School, Iworo 2 (Form No. 125994), Post Office
             St. Andrew (Code 008) Ona Onl Osun 1 and 2 (Code 012),lsimo Area Ilori’s House (Code 013), Idi Esi (Code 014) and
             Unity Area (Code 016) amongst others.
        
        
         IFAKI WARDS I & II

         viii.     The situation in this ward is not in any way different from  those obtainable from the wards earlier pleaded. In other
             words, in most of the results sheets for the 18 Polling Units, that is INEC Form EC.8A, it is manifestly evident that the
             entries in respect of the names of political parties, number  of votes scored by the parties, names and signatures of
             party agents as well as names and signatures of the  presiding officers were configured by one person. Curiously,
             In some of the Forms EC.8A for these Wards, particularly at Ifaki 2, only the PDP, on whose pIatform the Ist Respondent
             ran, was listed.
                 
      viii.     At Agbaludi Polling UnIt In lfakl Word II where the Action Congress Senatorial Candidate, Mr. Olu Adetunmbl
             registered and went with a view to cast his vote at 11.00am holding his Voter’s Card No. Ekiti/08/04/002 and showing
             same to the agents of the 2nd Respondent he was told to  his shock and utter dismay that election had closed and
             that his name had already been ticked on the register as having voted and thus was brazeniy
             disenfranchised.
        

         IDO WARDS I &II        
         ix. In these wards, agents of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents  merely compiled and allocated figures discretionally but
             indiscriminately to certain political parties but with a  calculated attempt to give undue advantage to the 1St
             Respondent herein. The INEC Form EC.8A purportedly  prepared by agents of the 3rd Respondent in respect of the
             31 Polling Units in these wards were done by these officials without any due regard to the wishes and aspirations of the
             electorate. Irregularities such as: common handwriting,  excess ballot papers for polling units, total number of used
             ballot papers/valid votes/rejected ballots added to unused  ballot papers being in excess of the number of ballot
             papers issued etc are noticeable on the said Form EC.8A used by the agents of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents.
        
         x.  Furthermore, there is no signature of parties’ agents of some or most of INEC Form EC8A purportedly used by the
             3rd Respondent in these Wards, just as in some of the Form EC.8A series, the 3rd Respondent listed only a few or one  or
             two political parties out of the dizzying numbers of politica  parties that registered, and indeed, presented candidates
             for the election. In the result sheet for Gemu Compound (St. John’s Church) in Ido Ward I, the 3rd Respondent. through
             one Mr. FaluyI Olufeml who purportedly acted as the Presiding Officer of the said unit, listed a political party
             known and styled as “VOID” and credited the said party  with “5” votes. By and large, the Form EC.8A series
             conjectured by the 2nd, 3rd and 8th Respondents as well as   their agents are a reflection of mutilation and or outrightly
             distorted, and joggled and meaningless expression.
        
         xi. Your Petitioner avers that the entire election in these wards was an outright sham, as the whole process was hijacked
             and stage-managed by agents, aides and hoodlums hire  by the 1st Respondent. Although voting in these wards in
             most polling units started peacefully as envisaged, the  peaceful atmosphere was however short-lived because the
             hoodlums/agents of the 1st Respondent /PDP moved  unrestrictdly from one polling unit to the other in a convoy
             of vehicles, chasing away legitimate voters and snatching  ballot boxes and other election material and later stuffing
             the ballot boxes with ballot papers that were unlawfully  thumb printed in favour of the 1st Respondent. During trial,
             your Petitioner shall found upon written complaint by the Chairman of these wards to the 3rd Respondent.
        
        
         IGBOLE/IFISIN/AAYE WARD    
       xii. The INEC Form EC.8A series produced by the 3rd, 4th and 8th Respondents and their agents for the 8 Polling Units in these
             Wards are nothing but a sham or a charade. The said forms are either outrightly mutilated or littered with cancellation.
             In polling units like Inika Community Primary School (Code 004), Okeode near Ogunleye House (Code 006) and
             Maternity (Code 003) only 3 political parties are listed, PDP, AC and ANPP. The AC agent whose names purportedly
             appeared on this Form EC.OA and who were purported to have signed the said forms in that capacity were among
             other registered voters who waited endlessly betwee 8.OOam and about 5.O0pm for officers of the 3rd Respondent
             who never turned up for election or electoral materials.
         
 OSI WARD 
        xiii.     In all, there are 12 Polling Units in this Ward in respect of which agents of the 2nd. 3rd and 8th Respondents purportedly
             acted as Presiding Officers without actually being physicall present thereat. Nevertheless, by sheer human “ingenuity”
             which will make the Heavens weep, they produced or manufactured results in the form of INEC Form EC.8A. A
             common thread which runs through or pervades the entire Form EC.8A in this Ward is that not a single agent, including
             that of the PDP on whose platform the 1st Respondent contested, signed or endorsed the said Forms.
         
         ORIN/ORA WARD
        
         xiv. Similar scenario as with the other Wards under this local  government played out itself in this ward. Of particular or
             striking importance is the fact that the total number of ballot papers used or rejected far exceeded the number of ballot
             papers issued to the Pollino Stations.
        
         Your Petitioner states that the 2nd. 3rd and 8th Responden declared the following results for your Petitioner and the 1st
         Respondent in this local government.

                                    Petitioner (AC)  – 4,373
                                   1st Respondent (PDP) – 32,300
         

         Your Petitioner disputes and rejects these figures and shall found upon the INEC “Statement of Result of polls from Local
         Government Areas elections to the office of the Governor” as well as INEC Form EC.8E.
        
         Your Petitioner states that as elections in this Local Government witnessed an unprecedented and staggering malpractices,
         election and/or the result for this Local Government ought to be cancelled.

UNQUOTE

 

 

Opt In Image
Send Me Free Email Updates

(enter your email address below)

Leave a Reply

*

Home | About | Contact | Login