Apex court give reason for upholding wike's Election.

The supreme court has come up with reasons
behind its Rivers election verdict that affirmed the
election of Nyesom wike as the validly elected
governor of the state
DAILY POST reports that the crux of the judgment
is that the trial tribunal and the lower appeal
court were wrongly swayed by INEC guideline on
the use of card readers for the election.
The court also said that the trial tribunal denied
Wike fair hearing when it was hearing the
petition.
It held that while it commends INEC for the
introduction of card readers, the innovation,
however, cannot supersede the voters register.
The court said that extant laws of the federation
provides for the use of voters register but the
card reader irrespective of its importance does
not have a place in any extant law of the land.
Hence it said that the tribunal was wrong to base
it judgment on non compliance with the use of
card readers.
It advised INEC to approach the National
Assembly for an amendment to incorporate the
use of card readers in the law of the land. On the issue of allegation of violence and
hijacking, the court held that Dakuku was not
able to prove beyond reasonable doubt because
he failed to bring in witnesses from all the polling
units to substantiate the claims.
The court also held that for peterside to prove
non accreditation, he ought to have tendered the
voters register and then demonstrate it.
The court said that the voters register could not
be jettisoned for the card reader because it has a
place in law while the card reader doesn’t.
The court also held that the tribunal and the
lower court were unduly swayed by INEC’s
directive on card reader usage during the election,
adding that it cannot supersede the voters
register.
However, the court while noting that INEC is
empowered to make subsidiary regulations as
regards election, said the regulations must not go
contrary to constitutional provisions.
On the evidence of INEC staff known as PW40
who described the election as a sham and a
mockery of democracy, the court held that his
evidence cannot take the place of voters as he
himself under cross exermination did not say that
he personally witnessed any violence but
depended on hearsay.
Finally the court held that to warrant nullification
of an election, a petitioner has to prove that there
was substantial non-compliance in all polling
units, adding that they failed to bring the issue
within this parametre.
The court commended INEC for its innovation of
the smart card readers but was quick to add that
validation of voting process through the use of
voters register takes precedent over any other
process for now.