Gadzama v NBA: One Vote Cast Returned Multiple Results, Witness Tells Court

The case between Gadzama v. NBA, before Hon. Justice
Adeniyi of Court 20, FCT High Court sitting in Apo once again
continued today, Friday, the 16th of February, 2018 for
hearing.

The matter began with the cross examination of the Plaintiff’s
Witness 5 (PW5), Mr. Andrew Agbo Madaki. Mr. Andrew Agbo Madaki, an
Information Technology expert who was cross examined by all the
Defendants had earlier stated on oath that the internet voting
mechanism adopted by the NBA for the 2016 NBA election was
different from the electronic voting provided for by the NBA
Constitution.

Testifying before the court, he stated that he was an Associate
Member of the British Computer Society and holds a Master degree in
Computer forensics. PW5 also told the Court that the internet
voting system used for the election was unreliable as one vote cast
returned multiple results during the demo exercise of the system
which he witnessed. PW5 further revealed under cross examination
that the Plaintiff’s experts and consultants were all denied access
to inspect the back end of the system and portal used for the
voting process prior to the election.

His Curriculum Vitae showing his in-depth knowledge,
qualification & experience in the field of ICT was tendered and
admitted in evidence as Exhibit P14 during cross examination.

Thereafter, the Plaintiff himself, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama, SAN
was examined in chief. The plaintiff adopted his Witness Statement
on Oath and Further Witness Statement on Oath. A total of 19
documents were tendered through the Plaintiff and admitted and
marked as Exhbits P15 to P34 respectively. Among the documents
tendered and admitted through the Plaintiff were (1) Letters dated
30th June, 2016 written by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN and titled:
‘RE: NBA ELECTIONS 2016 – OMISSION OF MY NAME ON THE VOTERS’
REGISTER’ (Exhibit P27) , a letter by the NBA Badagry Branch
Chairman and titled: ‘Complaints on Non Accreditation of Eligible
Voters from Badagry Branch’ dated 30th July, 2016 (Exhibit P29) and
a letter by the NBA Secretary of Ile-Ife branch dated 30th July
2016 and titled: ‘Inability of most NBA Ife Branch Members to vote
despite repeated attempts’.

The Defendants’ earlier objections to the admissibility of vital
electronically generated documents (which are: (1) Print-out of the
Kano NBA branch voters list where A. B Mahmoud, SAN’s name appeared
twice (2) Guidelines for the 2016 NBA election and (3) 2 different
print-outs of the 2016 NBA election result from the two different
ballot receipts used for the process, by the Plaintiff were all
overruled by the Court and the said Plaintiff’s documents were
admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits P32 to P34.

The matter was thereafter adjourned to 22nd & 23rd March and
27th and 28th April 2018 for continuation of trial.

TheNigerialawyer recalls that Gadzama Joe-Kyari SAN had earlier
challenged the outcome of the NBA presidential election for being
marred with irregularities among other things.TheNigerialawyer also
recalls that a witness had earlier testified in court that the NBA
elections were conducted on two different online domains.

The case between Gadzama v. NBA, before Hon. Justice
Adeniyi of Court 20, FCT High Court sitting in Apo once again
continued today, Friday, the 16th of February, 2018 for
hearing.

The matter began with the cross examination of the Plaintiff’s
Witness 5 (PW5), Mr. Andrew Agbo Madaki. Mr. Andrew Agbo Madaki, an
Information Technology expert who was cross examined by all the
Defendants had earlier stated on oath that the internet voting
mechanism adopted by the NBA for the 2016 NBA election was
different from the electronic voting provided for by the NBA
Constitution.

Testifying before the court, he stated that he was an Associate
Member of the British Computer Society and holds a Master degree in
Computer forensics. PW5 also told the Court that the internet
voting system used for the election was unreliable as one vote cast
returned multiple results during the demo exercise of the system
which he witnessed. PW5 further revealed under cross examination
that the Plaintiff’s experts and consultants were all denied access
to inspect the back end of the system and portal used for the
voting process prior to the election.

His Curriculum Vitae showing his in-depth knowledge,
qualification & experience in the field of ICT was tendered and
admitted in evidence as Exhibit P14 during cross examination.

Thereafter, the Plaintiff himself, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama, SAN
was examined in chief. The plaintiff adopted his Witness Statement
on Oath and Further Witness Statement on Oath. A total of 19
documents were tendered through the Plaintiff and admitted and
marked as Exhbits P15 to P34 respectively. Among the documents
tendered and admitted through the Plaintiff were (1) Letters dated
30th June, 2016 written by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN and titled:
‘RE: NBA ELECTIONS 2016 – OMISSION OF MY NAME ON THE VOTERS’
REGISTER’ (Exhibit P27) , a letter by the NBA Badagry Branch
Chairman and titled: ‘Complaints on Non Accreditation of Eligible
Voters from Badagry Branch’ dated 30th July, 2016 (Exhibit P29) and
a letter by the NBA Secretary of Ile-Ife branch dated 30th July
2016 and titled: ‘Inability of most NBA Ife Branch Members to vote
despite repeated attempts’.

The Defendants’ earlier objections to the admissibility of vital
electronically generated documents (which are: (1) Print-out of the
Kano NBA branch voters list where A. B Mahmoud, SAN’s name appeared
twice (2) Guidelines for the 2016 NBA election and (3) 2 different
print-outs of the 2016 NBA election result from the two different
ballot receipts used for the process, by the Plaintiff were all
overruled by the Court and the said Plaintiff’s documents were
admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits P32 to P34.

The matter was thereafter adjourned to 22nd & 23rd March and
27th and 28th April 2018 for continuation of trial.

TheNigerialawyer recalls that Gadzama Joe-Kyari SAN had earlier
challenged the outcome of the NBA presidential election for being
marred with irregularities among other things.TheNigerialawyer also
recalls that a witness had earlier testified in court that the NBA
elections were conducted on two different online domains.