Failed technology, failure to upload results on IReV discredited 2023 election — EU Observers

The European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) in Nigeria has stated that lack of transparency in the implementation of election technology used during the 2023 general election was part of the bane of the presidential election held on February 25.

EU EOM also noted that failure to promptly upload the presidential elections results on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Result Viewing (IReV) portal contributed to the erosion of public trust in the elections.

In its Final Report on the election released last week, the election observers noted that public enthusiasm rode high with the introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), a new technology for biometric voter verification, as well as electronic transmission of results forms by INEC.

All expectations, however, went down the drain with the failure of INEC to implement the acquired election technology.

Speaking on the failed election technology, EU EOM observed:

“Lack of transparency in the implementation of election technology used and failure to promptly upload the presidential elections results on IReV contributed to decreased public trust in the credibility of the elections.

“Public enthusiasm for the 2023 election was strengthened by the introduction by INEC, for the first time in a general election, of new technology for biometric voter verification and electronic transmission of results forms.

“BVAS was used for biometric facial and fingerprint voter verification and for scanning and uploading the forms.

“INEC used the IReV portal for publication of results, aiming to enhance transparency and trust and to minimise malpractices.

“The BVAS technology was originally introduced as INEC in house development in June 2021 for voter registration and has been used subsequently in off-cycle and by-elections, enabling gradual development and adaptation.

“On polling days, the BVAS was used to verify a voter’s identity by matching the fingerprints or face with the biometric data stored in the memory of the device – in the Nigerian context called accreditation.

“Without accreditation, the voter is not allowed to vote.

“BVAS implementation on election day should have significantly mitigated the possibility of multiple and proxy voting and recorded the number of voters who voted in assigned polling stations, so reducing eventual malpractices with inflating the number of voters who voted.

“A second use of BVAS was for scanning and uploading polling unit results forms to IReV.

“This was set up in August 2020 and used during Ekiti and Osun off-cycle elections in 2022.

“Its aim is to enhance transparency and overall confidence in results by providing real-time public access to polling unit results forms. This was intended to mitigate the risk of manipulation of results between the polling station and collation centre.

“Most stakeholders including CSOs conveyed a generally positive perception of the technological innovations prior to the elections,” it added.

On the legal framework that birthed the election technology, EU EOM stressed that the technology ought to have served as a safeguard against malpractices.

The group also observed that the law stipulates compulsory use of the technological device for voters’ accreditation and other details captured in INEC Regulations.

It said: “Given the context of extensive challenges to the integrity of the elections in recent years, there had been huge interest in increasing the use of technology as a safeguard against malpractices.

“Strong stakeholder demand in that direction led INEC to take proactive steps for a transition to increased use of technology.

“INEC strengthened its position through legal provisions for the use of technological devices for voter verification and electronic transmission or results (now introduced in the 2022 Act).

“Newly introduced provisions on the use of technology included article 47 of the 2022 Act for the verification, together with reasoning for cancellation of and re-scheduling of an election in respective polling units in case of malfunctioning and non-replacement of the technological device or if the device is not deployed.

“The law also stipulates compulsory use of the technological device for voters’ accreditation, further detailed in INEC Regulations.”

Respecting the electronic transmission of results, the group observed that the results processing measurements were not implemented and utilized during the elections.

It stated: “Relevant regulations refer to the electronic transmission of results to the collation system as well as uploading a scanned copy of the results form to IReV.

“This is only vaguely supported by article 60 of the 2022 Act. Regulations foresee electronic transmission of results from collation centre to the higher level of collation.

“These results processing measurements were not implemented and utilized during the elections, as the collation was conducted manually.

“Despite the clear intention to verify original hardcopy polling unit results forms with transmitted polling unit results during collation in the 2022 Act, the elaboration of these steps in the INEC Regulations is rather vague.

“The 2022 Act and INEC Regulations also stipulate the need for comparison of the number of accredited voters from the BVAS with the respective number on the results form.

“According to section 62 of the 2022 Act, INEC should maintain an electronic database of elections results but it remains unclear if this has been implemented yet.

“By the time that the EU EOM left the country, INEC did not publish the full presidential election results,” it added.

The group also lamented that the election technology used was implemented under serious deficiencies in the transparency of the whole process.

It emphasised that hardware and software specifications of BVAS, test results, audits, basic procurement details, protocols and guidelines for specific operations and functionality were not made public.

EU EOM also observed that “the functionality and specifics of the transmission of the results forms were also unclear, without details publicly available, apart from information found in late published manuals, lessening transparency, trust, and certainty.

“Interviewed Nigerian IT professionals (outside INEC) were not informed about the basic specifics of the election technology used.”

The group regretted that INEC missed the opportunity to substantively test operational issues connected with its technology before the 25 February election day despite conducting an inadequate mock exercise in 436 polling stations testing the functionality of the BVAS.

EU EOM observers and civil society stakeholders noted that the timing of the mock, the small size of the sample, low voter participation, and unclear written guidelines diminished the practical value of the exercise, while exposing some technical problems with biometric recognition and transmission of results.

Meanwhile, the mock exercise was run only by INEC professional staff and not by election day poll workers.

There was delayed recruitment and training of RATECHs, key technical support staff, as well as of polling staff handling BVAS with only one fifth of RATECHs trained at the time of the mock exercise.

EU EOM, therefore, recommended that INEC, should ensure transparency and allow for public scrutiny of election technology by mandating in law timely disclosure of test and audit results, together with protocols, guidelines, methodology of implementation, procurement, and functionality details.

Read also:

2023 general election: Why INEC failed ~ by European Union Election Observers

 Read more.

— 

©Copyright 2023 News Band

(If you would like to receive CURRENT NEWS updates from News Band on WhatsApp, or Telegram, or wish to send eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to elstimmy@gmail.com and we will respond instantly. Follow us on twitter @News Band; like our Facebook page: News Band.)

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook