FCT Council Election: INEC Confirms Clerical Error By Presiding Officer, Denies Purported 1219 Votes In Kwali
FCT Council Election: INEC Confirms Clerical Error By Presiding Officer, Denies Purported 1219 Votes In Kwali
INEC stated that the matter was investigated immediately to verify the reported figures.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has denied claims circulating online that 1,219 votes were recorded for the All Progressives Congress (APC) at Kuroko Health Centre polling unit in Yangoji Ward, Kwali Area Council, during the Federal Capital Territory Area Council election.
The Commission in a statement said the allegation was misleading and arose from a clerical error by the Presiding Officer.
INEC stated that the matter was investigated immediately to verify the reported figures. The officer who interrogated the Presiding Officer explained the process of correcting the results.
Describing the recount and correction, the Presiding Officer said: “I have spoken to the Presiding Officer. She recounted her experience. She said after sorting and counting the ballots, she recorded 122 for APC. On tallying everything, she noticed that there was an overshoot by one (1). So they had to recount the ballots in the open, that was when she realised that APC should be 121 not 122. So she cancelled the ‘2’ at the end and slotted in a ‘1’ in front of the cancelled ‘2’ to make it 121. She also corrected the figures in words.”
INEC confirmed that the official result uploaded from the polling unit recorded 121 votes for the party, not 1,219 as alleged. Party agents present at the polling unit signed the result, which was entered into the collation form EC8B at the Ward Collation stage.
The Commission added that the same figure of 121 votes was used during the Area Council collation, ensuring consistency in the official tally.
INEC explained that its electronic systems, BVAS and IReV, include validation checks that prevent over-voting and flag inconsistencies automatically, making manipulation in the manner alleged technically impossible.
On the social media claim of inflated votes, INEC said: “If, as alleged, a figure of 1,219 votes had been entered: The BVAS device would have rejected the entry instantly. The total votes cast would necessarily have reflected such an inflated figure. The discrepancy would have been flagged at the multiple collation stages. None of these occurred because the official recorded score was 121, not 1,219.”
The Commission reassured the public that the IReV portal mirrors results uploaded directly from polling units and remains a tool for transparency during elections.
