Media24flashnews Abuja: The judges scheduled the hearing for 2pm throughout the week yet walked into the courtroom yesterday at 2:30pm with a straight face and total disregard for people waiting. Today, they are still not in the courtroom. Then 2 hours later, they will dismiss everyone. LP’s time is running out.
Court Updates:
Finally The Justices are here!
It’s 2:49pm and the court now sits at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal for the afternoon session.
Justice Adah welcomes everyone.
REPRESENTATIONS
- Peter Obi represents himself and Labour Party
- Chris Maigida represents the 4th Respondent
PETITIONERS (LP) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: DR LIVY UZOUKWU SAN
- Onyechi Ikpeazu SAN
- PIN Ikwueto SAN
- Ben Anechebe SAN
- Ikechukwu Ezechukwu SAN
- Valeria Azinge SAN
- Alex Ejesieme SAN
- Peter Afuba SAN
- Audu Anuga SAN
- Rita Chris-Garba Esq
- Chief Olusola Esq
- Mathias Esq
1ST RESPONDENT (INEC) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: AB MAHMOUD SAN
- Kemi Pinhero SAN
- Ehinai SAN
- Abdullahi Aliyu SAN
- Tanimu Inuwa SAN
- Suleiman Ibrahim SAN
- Nasara Auta Esq
- Patricia Obi Esq
- Chukwudi Enebeli Esq
2ND & 3RD RESPONDENTS (TINUBU/SHETTIMA) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: WOLE OLANIKPEKUN SAN
- Akin Olujimi SAN
- Emmanuel SAN
- Tami Madaki SAN
- Mike Igbokwe SAN
- Dele Adesina SAN
- Oladipo Opeseyi SAN
- Yomi SAN
- Lanre SAN
- Fumilayo SAN
- Yemi SAN
- Abubakar SAN
- Abimbola Makinde Esq
- O. Salami Esq
4TH RESPONDENT (APC) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: LO FAGBEMI SAN
- Charles Edoson SAN
- Afolabi Fashanu SAN
- Olabisi SAN
- Abiodun Owonikoko SAN
- Solomon Umoh SAN
- Rotimi Oguneso SAN
- Oluseye Opasanya SAN
- Oluseye Oke SAN
- Adeniji Kazeem SAN
- Aliyu Sarki SAN
- Anthony Adeniyi SAN
Here we go!
Dr Livy informs the court that their witness PW7 is in court for cross-examination since the process was stood down yesterday.
PIN Ikwueto will conduct proceedings for the Petitioners.
Cross examination for Yesterday’s Witness (PW7), the AWS Cloud Engineer is about to commence
1st Respondent (INEC) Cross-examination
Q. Para 6 of your witness statement, you set out the software developing life cycle, I suggest to you that you missed an important element of the circle that is post production maintenance.
A. I didn’t miss it out, different companies have…
different development life cycles
Q. Frequently, it is at the post production maintenance stage that glitches and issues appear, correct?
A. That is incorrect, glitches appear during testing stage
Q. The exhibit you tendered PCJ3… Speaks to the AWS Health Dashboard across all
Regions, correct?
A. Yes
Q. In the Personal Health Dashboard for INEC services of AWS is not before the court
A. The status is the same information with the Personal Health Dashboard which is general to all clients
Q. AWS adopts a shared responsibility model for security of services
A. Correct
Q. By shared, we refer to AWS part as well as customer’s part
A. Correct
Q. The part of AWS is what is dealt with in the exhibit you tendered
A. The reports I tendered was to show health status of AWS services for all regions and not related to security
Q. To know specifically what happened on application deployed by customers, you’ll require a different report?
A. Not necessarily
Q. I suggest to u necessarily
A. That is incorrect
Q. The reports have nothing to do with the application of INEC.
A. The applications are hosted on AWS services & if there is a glitch, it will impact the application. The report shows the health report of AWS that can host apps
Q. Are you familiar with AWS cloud trail?
A. Yes I am
Q. There is a cloud trail for INEC
A. There is a cloud trail for every API action made within that account
Q. The cloud trail with respect of INEC is not before the court?
A. No! I do not have access to INEC infrastructure
Q. Cloud trail is the best evidence for what happened In relation to INEC
A. Incorrect
Q. It is not unusual for glitches to occur on apps or software deployed by companies
A. It is highly unusual for glitches pertaining to primary functions to occur in
production (when available to public.
Q. You are aware about the glitch on CBN E-naira
A. I’m not aware
Q. You’re aware on MTN Momo PSB glitches
A. I don’t, I’m only here on AWS
Q. You were a candidate of the LP in the last election
A. Yes, it’s in my witness statement
Q. You are not here on the authority of Amazon
A. I’m here as an expert witness, not on Amazon
Q. You’re here as a Labour Party activist
A. That’s incorrect
2nd and 3rd Respondents Cross-examination:
Q. Look at your letter tendered before the court. It has no author, no name.
A. There is, Employee Resource Center is the name of the author
Q. May I suggest to you that Employee Resource Center is a person
A. It’s a department that
Handles employment verification.
Q. The letter is not signed.
A. It’s signed by employee resource center.
Q. There is a signature there?
A. This is the verification letter given to all employees within Amazon
Q. You didn’t attach iD cards
A. AWS does not issue identity cards
Q. There is no appointment letter given to you
A. The appointment verification letter states my appointment date
Q. This is not your first time in court
A. I’ve been here a few times
Q. You have a Twitter handle
A. Yes
Q. This is your Twitter handle ++++
A. That’s right
Q. You have put what you’ve watched on your Twitter handle
A. That’s incorrect
Q. I suggest to you that you downloaded the reports from AWS site
A. The reports ar public information posted by Amazon
Q. The reports are not your product
A. They are because I brought them to court
Q. You contested election to House of Reps in the Labour Party
A. Yes
Q. What’s your feeling about that, are you happy?
A. I’m Indifferent
Q. The authorship of this report is not yours
A. I brought them to court, so they are mine
Q. You contested primaries of LP in your constituency, did you win
A. I won
Q. Did you go to Court to file any action at all
A. Yes I did
Q. You sued INEC because INEC did not put your name on the list of candidate
A. That’s correct
Q. Your complain in court was that you made several effort to upload your data to INEC portal but it failed because of network failure
A. Yes
Q. Do you agree that network failure is also a glitch and there was a glitch on the INEC site at that time
A. I disagree, network failure
Could have happened on the side of the person performing the upload
Q. You said in your affidavit that the INEC site crashed
A. That’s right
Q. Are you aware that in 2017 the AWS S3 cloud service experienced an out time on Tuesday 28 February 2017
A. I was aware
Q. Are you aware that in 2021 that AWS was recorded to have over 27 outages?
A. I’m aware that’s why I presented health status report
Q. You know that LP, won the presidential election in 12 states & FCT
A. I’m here as an expert witness
Q. He asks the question again
A. I can’t speak to the matter that is in court
Q. In Para 9, the polling unit result you referred to is form EC8A
A. I believe so
Q. I suggest to you that when information on the result is uploaded, it is only the image that is transfered
A. You could upload anything, I cannot speak to what is transmitted.
Q. You come from Cross-River State, which party won the presidential election in the state?
A. Yes, I do not know who won
Q. Who’s the president of USA
A. Joe Biden
Q. He contested against who
A. I’m not here as an election expert
4th Respondent cross-examination
Q. You did not have or conduct any investigation on the application used by INEC in the election
A. I conducted preliminary investigation on the IREV
Q. He asks the question again (requiring straight answer)
A. Para 9 says that I conducted
Preliminary review of the INEC website
Q. It is not an application
A. It is
Q. Tell the court how many votes were affected by the glitch you talked about
A. I’m not here as an election expert, according to my report, there was no glitches on AWS
Q. Are you aware that between a customer of AWS and AWS itself there’s usually what is known as non-disclosure agreement-NDA
A. I’m aware of a service level agreement, not an NDA
Q. Do you have a copy of this service level agreement between INEC and AWS
A. The service level agreement applies to all customers of AWS and I attached the link in my witness statement. I’m here to speak about general agreement between all customers and AWS
Q. In this agreement, is there a clause about confidentiality of the operation of the application.
A. I cannot state categorically
Q. Are you aware that there will always be password protocol defining who can access and modify the application
A. I don’t work for INEC and know
Nothing about their password protocol
Q. the report you downloaded, did you use any password
A. No I did not
Q. You’ll then agree with me that it is an open access information
A. That’s correct, everything in my witness statement is open to the public
Q. You don’t have the password protocol
A. I don’t.
Q. Password protocol contains how parties for an agreement can go into and amend or adjust anything on the application
A. I cannot speak to password protocols
Q. Can you on your own, modify the public information you accessed
A. No I can’t
Q. You are not representing Amazon in this case
A. No I’m here as an expert witness
Q. You’re not representing INEC
A. No I’m not
Q. In CrossRiver, did you file any electio petition
A. No i didn’t
Q. Apart from the outage asked earlier, are you aware AWS glitch also affected Japan Brokers Sept 2, 2021
A. I can’t confirm that, the last glitch on Amazon was December 10, 2021
Q. If it happened then, it can happen again
A. Anything is possible
That’s all on the CROSS-EXAM
Re-Examination:
Q. She’s asked to re-explain what API means
A. API means Application Program Interface
The witness is discharged
Dr Livy now informs the court that the Bailiff succeeded in serving INEC the subpoena and there’s someone from INEC in court.
He now requests for the representative of INEC to inform the court whether she came with court the documents INEC was subpoen to produce today
A woman is here, Ronkeji Olufumilayo Tairu (Mrs), Department of Certification and Complains, Legal Drafting, to represent the INEC Chairman.
She’s here to present documents before the court in response to the subpoena duces Tecum
There were two subpoenas: that of 30th May and 13th June 2023.
She informs the court that she’s here for the one dated 30th May but someone else will come in respect of the one of 13th June
She says in respect of ‘Document A’, they don’t have anything like that in existence.
For documents listed in paragraph B,C,D, E, they will come from the states and they don’t have logistics in place to get them now.
They only have the documents listed in para R & S
She just states that the ICT Representative is here to give the documents requested by the subpoena of 13th June…
Dr Livy requests to know when they will bring documents A-E, noting that Document A is all over their site and cannot be said not to be in their possession
She states that they just got the subpoena yesterday and the documents are so enormous for them to bring all at once to court. She says they will be ready as soon as possible.
Livy SAN responds back that ‘as soon as possible’ is not a time as the case should conclude on Friday.
AB Mahmoud notes that the woman have appropriately explained the situation and that the documents are across the states and will be brought.
He states that it is not fair that the subpoena was served yesterday and the Petitioners are pressing for the documents
That they’ve not paid and are pressing for the documents.
Dr Livy notes that the subpoena have been available since 30th May and he met with AB Mahmoud twice, yet they are giving excuses when they refused to accept service.
He says it’s a deliberate action to frustrate them. Dr Livy also said that some of the documents are in Abuja and nearby states, he asks if they’ve produced them.
Fumilayo responds that the ones in Abuja is what they provided today and that logistics from all states is what they are waiting for. She says they e not paid
Dr. Livy responds that let them bring the document ‘NOW NOW’ and the money will be paid immediately.
Justice Tsammani asks Dr. Livy that if they are unable to produce the documents tomorrow what happens?
Dr Livy SAN responds that then they’ve flouted an order of court.
Justice Tsammani asks again that what should be done by the court and Dr Livy if INEC fails to produce the documents.
Dr. Livy states that they will move an application but let them wait till tomorrow and see.
AB Mahmoud refers the court to Section 74 of Electoral Act…
Dr Livy noted that they sent lawyers with an application to the states and they refused to hand over the documents, that, the documents must be certified by the INEC headquarters
The court is displeased by the reactions of people in court, that lawyers are showing misconduct and saying ‘no no no no’, that these days, that senior advocate and judges are speaking and they are reaction. there’s no respect for elders
Justice Tsammani asks the way forward and his application…
Dr Livy prays the court that INEC having failed to provide the documents requested by the order of the court that the court mandate them to produce it tomorrow.
Dr. Livy notes that INEC created this situation for refusing to accept service of the subpoena. He expressed displeasure at the conduct of INEC in the entire proceedings and that if they want to indeed provide the documents, they can provide it tomorrow
The court now requests the petitioners provide the documents which show they have made these applications for the documents to show the contravention of Section 74 of the Electoral Act.
Justice Adah notes that the Petitioners could have lodged a formal complain of the violation of Section 74(2) so that the penalty for violation will be implemented.
Dr Livy responds that the Resident Commissioners were ordered by the National INEC not to release documents…
Except by the order of the National INEC
The court notes that the petitioners were supposed to request subpoena for the resident electoral commissioners so that at the violation, they could be punished, but they requested subpoena for the INEC commission headquarters and chairman
Leave a Reply