Winning the Election, but Losing the Litigation: A Prognosis of Nigerian Judicial Attitudes Toward Evidence Produced from 'E-Accreditation Machines'

摘要

There is already a developed body of literature on electronic accreditation in the context of elections, but discourse on the evidence-related consequences of this e-accreditation is sparse. In other words, scholarship's searchlight on the admissibility and weight of "computer evidence from e-accreditation machines (CEEM)" in electoral litigation needs to be brighter than ever. This legal inquiry is important as elections are sometimes won or lost in courts and on the basis of such electronically-obtained electoral data. This gap will be filled by the present paper. Using Nigeria as a case study, this paper undertook a doctrinal analysis of its appellate courts' opinions on "electronic accreditation". The analysis shows that the admissibility of CEEM often turns on the age-long hearsay rule; however, considering the unique nature of CEEM, this paper argues for a revised attitude towards the hearsay rule. In ascribing weight to the admitted CEEM, this paper proposes a standard that is based on the Relative Plausibility Theory; this standard will ensure that parties' evidence is fairly evaluated and that winners are not made into losers in the courts.