According to SAN Kargbo, questioning an election is only permissible when there is evidence of non-compliance with the Electoral Act.

Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Sam Kargbo, has asserted that petitioners are restricted from contesting the election outcome based solely on electoral boundaries but are rather limited to challenging it solely on the grounds of non-compliance with the electoral act. This statement was made in reference to the ruling by the PEPT justices, which concluded that compelling INEC to upload results is not within their purview. Kargbo emphatically emphasized that petitioners cannot employ the absence of transparency in the electoral process as a legal basis for action against INEC.

During an interview with AIT News, he expressed, “While ethical and moral concerns may strongly resonate with the public, they do not hold legal weight within the parameters of the law. It is abundantly clear from the Electoral Act that INEC’s directives cannot serve as a basis for challenging an election. Asserting that an election was compromised due to noncompliance with the Electoral Act or INEC’s Election Regulations is not a valid argument and will be dismissed.

The principle here is to adhere to the law as it stands without introducing new interpretations or additions. INEC possesses the authority to establish regulations to enhance the credibility and transparency of the electoral process. However, if they fall short in doing so, can that be a legitimate reason to contest the election? No.”