A Coalition of civil societies have called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to be wary of forged voters’ signatures seeking for the recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of Kogi Central Senatorial District.
Recall that INEC had on Tuesday identified lapses in the petition over the failure of petitioners to fully comply with its rules by providing addresses, phone numbers and emails.
The Executive Director, Grassroots Centre for Rights & Civic Orientation Mr Armsfree Ajanaku said in a statement that the group has closely followed the activities of some constituents in Kogi Central Senatorial District who have indicated readiness to recall Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan over alleged loss of confidence.
”While it is the right of constituents as enshrined in Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 113 of Electoral Act to initiate a process of recall of their representative, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) must ensure strict adherence to due process, transparency and accountability in its management of the process.
”As Nigeria’s Election Management Body (EMB), INEC must be vigilant in order not to fall for the antics of desperate and corrupt political forces that will stop at nothing to subvert the express democratic wishes and aspirations of the electorate.
”From our close observation of this recall process so far, underhand tactics, the misinformation of a larger section of constituents and the use of unethical methods to hoodwink and deceive citizens have been on constant display. “he said.
The group expressed concerned about the integrity and credibility of the process, particularly after several online videos showed how several constituents were deceived and hoodwinked of being invited for empowerment and palliatives.
”Many of these unsuspecting citizens came out to collect palliative items, only to discover that their signatures and biometric details were being collected for the purpose of a recall.
”A signature collection process, which is already marred by blatant signature buying, and all manner of unethical inducement should be a source of concern to INEC. Recall signature buying, like vote buying is criminal, and should be denounced by all well-meaning stakeholders. ” he stated.
The Centre has also observed and documented online footages showing some political actors and their agents sitting in the comfort of their living rooms to compile fake signatures for the recall.
”These barefaced falsification and underhand tactics, which amount to forgeries, impersonation and an attempt to subvert the real intention of constituents, cannot be waved off by INEC as it superintends the process.
”This point is critical because the integrity of the process will be determined by the authenticity of the signatures collected.
Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution as amended is very clear in noting that: “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives may be recalled as such a member if: a) there is presented to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission a petition in the behalf, signed by more than one-half of the persons registered to vote in that member’s constituency alleging their loss of confidence in that member…”
”At the heart of the recall process therefore is the issue of the authenticity of registered voters who sign such a recall petition. This point is further reinforced in Part 1, Section 1(b), which similarly notes that “The petition shall be signed by more than one half of the persons (that is, at least one person above half) registered to vote in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled, alleging loss of confidence in that member.”
Sections (d) of the INEC guidelines also notes that the :”signing of the petition may be by signatures or thumbprints of the petitioners, just as Section (e) mandates that: “The names, Voter Identification Numbers (VIN) and signatures of the petitioners shall be arranged according to Polling Units in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled.” All of these provisions point to the critical role, which will be played by not just the register of voters, but ensuring it is the signature of the exact voters that have been collected. “he stated
Grassroots Centre therefore calls on INEC to take extra measures to ensure forged signatures do not pass through in the process of verification.
The process of verification should be handled transparently, and the methods for determining the credibility or otherwise of the signatures should be made known to all stakeholders, including the media, civil society organisations, political parties and security agencies.
The group added that in cases where forged or falsified signatures are discovered to have been attached to the petition, Grassroots Centre calls for the investigation, prosecution and public shaming of the leaders and representatives who submitted such forgeries.
INEC: Group Calls on the Commission to be Wary of Forged Voters’ Signatures
A Coalition of civil societies have called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to be wary of forged voters’ signatures seeking for the recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of Kogi Central Senatorial District.
Recall that INEC had on Tuesday identified lapses in the petition over the failure of petitioners to fully comply with its rules by providing addresses, phone numbers and emails.
The Executive Director, Grassroots Centre for Rights & Civic Orientation Mr Armsfree Ajanaku said in a statement that the group has closely followed the activities of some constituents in Kogi Central Senatorial District who have indicated readiness to recall Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan over alleged loss of confidence.
”While it is the right of constituents as enshrined in Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 113 of Electoral Act to initiate a process of recall of their representative, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) must ensure strict adherence to due process, transparency and accountability in its management of the process.
”As Nigeria’s Election Management Body (EMB), INEC must be vigilant in order not to fall for the antics of desperate and corrupt political forces that will stop at nothing to subvert the express democratic wishes and aspirations of the electorate.
”From our close observation of this recall process so far, underhand tactics, the misinformation of a larger section of constituents and the use of unethical methods to hoodwink and deceive citizens have been on constant display. “he said.
The group expressed concerned about the integrity and credibility of the process, particularly after several online videos showed how several constituents were deceived and hoodwinked of being invited for empowerment and palliatives.
”Many of these unsuspecting citizens came out to collect palliative items, only to discover that their signatures and biometric details were being collected for the purpose of a recall.
”A signature collection process, which is already marred by blatant signature buying, and all manner of unethical inducement should be a source of concern to INEC. Recall signature buying, like vote buying is criminal, and should be denounced by all well-meaning stakeholders. ” he stated.
The Centre has also observed and documented online footages showing some political actors and their agents sitting in the comfort of their living rooms to compile fake signatures for the recall.
”These barefaced falsification and underhand tactics, which amount to forgeries, impersonation and an attempt to subvert the real intention of constituents, cannot be waved off by INEC as it superintends the process.
”This point is critical because the integrity of the process will be determined by the authenticity of the signatures collected.
Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution as amended is very clear in noting that: “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives may be recalled as such a member if: a) there is presented to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission a petition in the behalf, signed by more than one-half of the persons registered to vote in that member’s constituency alleging their loss of confidence in that member…”
”At the heart of the recall process therefore is the issue of the authenticity of registered voters who sign such a recall petition. This point is further reinforced in Part 1, Section 1(b), which similarly notes that “The petition shall be signed by more than one half of the persons (that is, at least one person above half) registered to vote in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled, alleging loss of confidence in that member.”
Sections (d) of the INEC guidelines also notes that the :”signing of the petition may be by signatures or thumbprints of the petitioners, just as Section (e) mandates that: “The names, Voter Identification Numbers (VIN) and signatures of the petitioners shall be arranged according to Polling Units in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled.” All of these provisions point to the critical role, which will be played by not just the register of voters, but ensuring it is the signature of the exact voters that have been collected. “he stated
Grassroots Centre therefore calls on INEC to take extra measures to ensure forged signatures do not pass through in the process of verification.
The process of verification should be handled transparently, and the methods for determining the credibility or otherwise of the signatures should be made known to all stakeholders, including the media, civil society organisations, political parties and security agencies.
The group added that in cases where forged or falsified signatures are discovered to have been attached to the petition, Grassroots Centre calls for the investigation, prosecution and public shaming of the leaders and representatives who submitted such forgeries.
LEAVE A REPLY
A Coalition of civil societies have called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to be wary of forged voters’ signatures seeking for the recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of Kogi Central Senatorial District.
Recall that INEC had on Tuesday identified lapses in the petition over the failure of petitioners to fully comply with its rules by providing addresses, phone numbers and emails.
The Executive Director, Grassroots Centre for Rights & Civic Orientation Mr Armsfree Ajanaku said in a statement that the group has closely followed the activities of some constituents in Kogi Central Senatorial District who have indicated readiness to recall Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan over alleged loss of confidence.
”While it is the right of constituents as enshrined in Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 113 of Electoral Act to initiate a process of recall of their representative, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) must ensure strict adherence to due process, transparency and accountability in its management of the process.
”As Nigeria’s Election Management Body (EMB), INEC must be vigilant in order not to fall for the antics of desperate and corrupt political forces that will stop at nothing to subvert the express democratic wishes and aspirations of the electorate.
”From our close observation of this recall process so far, underhand tactics, the misinformation of a larger section of constituents and the use of unethical methods to hoodwink and deceive citizens have been on constant display. “he said.
The group expressed concerned about the integrity and credibility of the process, particularly after several online videos showed how several constituents were deceived and hoodwinked of being invited for empowerment and palliatives.
”Many of these unsuspecting citizens came out to collect palliative items, only to discover that their signatures and biometric details were being collected for the purpose of a recall.
”A signature collection process, which is already marred by blatant signature buying, and all manner of unethical inducement should be a source of concern to INEC. Recall signature buying, like vote buying is criminal, and should be denounced by all well-meaning stakeholders. ” he stated.
The Centre has also observed and documented online footages showing some political actors and their agents sitting in the comfort of their living rooms to compile fake signatures for the recall.
”These barefaced falsification and underhand tactics, which amount to forgeries, impersonation and an attempt to subvert the real intention of constituents, cannot be waved off by INEC as it superintends the process.
”This point is critical because the integrity of the process will be determined by the authenticity of the signatures collected.
Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution as amended is very clear in noting that: “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives may be recalled as such a member if: a) there is presented to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission a petition in the behalf, signed by more than one-half of the persons registered to vote in that member’s constituency alleging their loss of confidence in that member…”
”At the heart of the recall process therefore is the issue of the authenticity of registered voters who sign such a recall petition. This point is further reinforced in Part 1, Section 1(b), which similarly notes that “The petition shall be signed by more than one half of the persons (that is, at least one person above half) registered to vote in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled, alleging loss of confidence in that member.”
Sections (d) of the INEC guidelines also notes that the :”signing of the petition may be by signatures or thumbprints of the petitioners, just as Section (e) mandates that: “The names, Voter Identification Numbers (VIN) and signatures of the petitioners shall be arranged according to Polling Units in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled.” All of these provisions point to the critical role, which will be played by not just the register of voters, but ensuring it is the signature of the exact voters that have been collected. “he stated
Grassroots Centre therefore calls on INEC to take extra measures to ensure forged signatures do not pass through in the process of verification.
The process of verification should be handled transparently, and the methods for determining the credibility or otherwise of the signatures should be made known to all stakeholders, including the media, civil society organisations, political parties and security agencies.
The group added that in cases where forged or falsified signatures are discovered to have been attached to the petition, Grassroots Centre calls for the investigation, prosecution and public shaming of the leaders and representatives who submitted such forgeries.
LEAVE A REPLY
A Coalition of civil societies have called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to be wary of forged voters’ signatures seeking for the recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of Kogi Central Senatorial District.
Recall that INEC had on Tuesday identified lapses in the petition over the failure of petitioners to fully comply with its rules by providing addresses, phone numbers and emails.
The Executive Director, Grassroots Centre for Rights & Civic Orientation Mr Armsfree Ajanaku said in a statement that the group has closely followed the activities of some constituents in Kogi Central Senatorial District who have indicated readiness to recall Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan over alleged loss of confidence.
”While it is the right of constituents as enshrined in Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 113 of Electoral Act to initiate a process of recall of their representative, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) must ensure strict adherence to due process, transparency and accountability in its management of the process.
”As Nigeria’s Election Management Body (EMB), INEC must be vigilant in order not to fall for the antics of desperate and corrupt political forces that will stop at nothing to subvert the express democratic wishes and aspirations of the electorate.
”From our close observation of this recall process so far, underhand tactics, the misinformation of a larger section of constituents and the use of unethical methods to hoodwink and deceive citizens have been on constant display. “he said.
The group expressed concerned about the integrity and credibility of the process, particularly after several online videos showed how several constituents were deceived and hoodwinked of being invited for empowerment and palliatives.
”Many of these unsuspecting citizens came out to collect palliative items, only to discover that their signatures and biometric details were being collected for the purpose of a recall.
”A signature collection process, which is already marred by blatant signature buying, and all manner of unethical inducement should be a source of concern to INEC. Recall signature buying, like vote buying is criminal, and should be denounced by all well-meaning stakeholders. ” he stated.
The Centre has also observed and documented online footages showing some political actors and their agents sitting in the comfort of their living rooms to compile fake signatures for the recall.
”These barefaced falsification and underhand tactics, which amount to forgeries, impersonation and an attempt to subvert the real intention of constituents, cannot be waved off by INEC as it superintends the process.
”This point is critical because the integrity of the process will be determined by the authenticity of the signatures collected.
Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution as amended is very clear in noting that: “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives may be recalled as such a member if: a) there is presented to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission a petition in the behalf, signed by more than one-half of the persons registered to vote in that member’s constituency alleging their loss of confidence in that member…”
”At the heart of the recall process therefore is the issue of the authenticity of registered voters who sign such a recall petition. This point is further reinforced in Part 1, Section 1(b), which similarly notes that “The petition shall be signed by more than one half of the persons (that is, at least one person above half) registered to vote in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled, alleging loss of confidence in that member.”
Sections (d) of the INEC guidelines also notes that the :”signing of the petition may be by signatures or thumbprints of the petitioners, just as Section (e) mandates that: “The names, Voter Identification Numbers (VIN) and signatures of the petitioners shall be arranged according to Polling Units in the constituency of the member sought to be recalled.” All of these provisions point to the critical role, which will be played by not just the register of voters, but ensuring it is the signature of the exact voters that have been collected. “he stated
Grassroots Centre therefore calls on INEC to take extra measures to ensure forged signatures do not pass through in the process of verification.
The process of verification should be handled transparently, and the methods for determining the credibility or otherwise of the signatures should be made known to all stakeholders, including the media, civil society organisations, political parties and security agencies.
The group added that in cases where forged or falsified signatures are discovered to have been attached to the petition, Grassroots Centre calls for the investigation, prosecution and public shaming of the leaders and representatives who submitted such forgeries.