Former Nigeria Vice President, and Presidential Candidate of the Action Congress, AC, Abubakar Atiku has described answers by chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC), Prof. Maurice Iwu, to his(Atiku) 27 interrogatories, as false and evasive. Atiku who made this declaration in a supplementary final address by his counsels at the Court of Appeal, also contended that the 5th respondent( Iwu) is making a calculated attempt to mislead or deceive the court.

This is another leg in the legal back and forth between Atiku and President Umaru Ya'Adua over the legality of the mandate given to the latter by INEC. Atiku had consistently maintained that due to wide range of irregularities at the polls in a large number of states,as observed by various election monitors including the European Union, the election and and subsequent inauguration of the President is illegal, and that he won the election.

A couple of weeks ago, Atiku had asked Iwu 27 questions covering among others, the printing, and distribution of ballot papers to local council areas by INEC. Last week, the INEC replied, but according to counsels to the former Vice President, led by Prof. Ben Nwabueze(SAN), there were inconsistencies in Iwu's reply to questions 1-11.

Iwu had in his reply maintained that the commission never contracted the printing of ballot papers for last April Presidential elections to any firm in South Africa, but the INEC official, according to Atiku, report contains the contrary.

They argued that " we cant conclude our comments on answers given by Iwu as to where the ballot papers were printed, without reference to the INEC official report"

Counsels to Atiku pointed out to the court portions of the INEC report prepared by Iwu, which confirms that a large chunk of the ballot papers were contracted by INEC to firms in South Africa.. The report read in part" He (Ex President Obasanjo), followed this up by providing the presidential jet for relevant officials of the commission to travel to South Africa to negotiate for the immediate printing of ballot papers..."

The Atiku's flank then submitted that Iwu's statement " cannot be displaced by a perjured statement under oath filed by the 5th respondent before this court"

The cited Nnajiofor & Ors vs Ukoma (1986) 2 NSCC, where the court states that ' witness who testifies falsely on matters which are within his knowledge personally, leaves no room for a judge to credit him with any credibility on issues in contest before him'

While urging the court to grant reliefs 6, and 7 to atiku his counsels also sought the leave of the court to tender the INEC report as evidence.

Atiku also pointed out that Iwu failed to answer all other questions relating to the instructions given to the printers, and also the quantities of the ballot papers he ordered and date of receipt of the ballot papers.