By Giwa Suliat Bolaji (SIWES student D S Adegbenro ICT Polytechnic)
The Supreme Court ruled that the lack of election results on iRev is not a valid foundation for negating an election. Justice Inyang Okoro, the leader of the five-panel of justices, made this ruling in response to appeals filed by Peter Obi of the Labour Party and Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party.
They had challenged the Presidential Elections Petitions Court’s decision to uphold Bola Tinubu’s February election win. The court emphasized that to nullify an election, the petitioner must demonstrate that noncompliance substantially affected the election. In this case, the appellants relied on INEC’s inability to electronically transmit results to the IReV portal, but Justice Okoro stressed that the Electoral Act grants INEC the authority to determine the transmission mode.
He also emphasized that the interpretation of the constitution should serve the people’s interests, and a narrow approach should be avoided. Ultimately, the court dismissed the appellants’ claims.
Regarding your question, the court’s ruling doesn’t directly address the scenario you mentioned, but it does emphasize that the interpretation of the constitution should serve the interests of the people.
Whether a candidate can be declared president with a majority of votes across the country but a loss in the Federal Capital Territory would likely depend on the specific electoral rules and regulations in place at the time.
