voters register/computer generated documents

A voters register maintained by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is a public document as envisaged in Section 102 of the Evidence Act, 2011 and by virtue of Sections (89)(e) and 90(1)(c) of the Evidence Act, 2011 only the certified true copy of it is admissible. In Balonwu V. Emorde (2010) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1174) 79 CA, not even photocopies of a certified true copies was held to be admissible.

An electronic voter’s register comes under computer generated document. As such, for same to be admissible the following condition must be satisfied:

• a. That the register sought to be tendered was produced by the computer during a period when it was in regular use.
• b. That during the period of regular usage, information similar to the one contained in the document was supplied to the computer.
• c. That the computer was operating properly during that period of regular use.
• d. That the information contained in the document or statement was supplied to the computer in the ordinary course of its normal use. Section 84(2) Evidence Act, 2011.

Yes. Section 84(4) Evidence Act, 2011 requires that a party seeking to tender a computer generated document must file a certificate:

• i. Identifying the document of statement.
• ii. Describing the manner of its production.
• iii. Stating the particulars of the device used in the production of the document.

The certificate is required to be signed by a person occupying a responsible position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities.

Yes. It is very compulsory that statement produced by a computer must fulfil the requirement of section 84 of the Evidence Act, 2011. The above section does not recognize any dichotomy in the nature and character of electronically generated documentary evidence. In Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1482) 205. The above provision of the law was kept straight that once a statement contained in a document is produced by computer it must pass through the huddles and fulfil the requirement of section 84(2) and (4) Evidence Act, 2011.

Except where it falls within the exceptions provided for by Sections 40-50 of the Evidence Act, 2011, documentary evidence made from a computer will not be admissible where direct oral evidence of the fact contained in the document are ordinarily inadmissible. The intention is to make hearsay evidence inadmissible in evidence. Sections 40-50 and 84 of the Evidence Act, 2011

Public document that requires certifications and are computer generated will still have to be certified under Section 104 of the Evidence Act, 2011 and then be subjected to section 84 Evidence Act before it will be admissible in evidence. Kubor V. Dickson (2013) 4 NWLR (1345) 534

No. The fact that a piece of evidence is admitted is no guarantee that it will be accorded any weight of course, once the requirement under section 84(2) and (4) of the Evidence ACT, 2011 is satisfied, such evidence is admissible. However, this does not automatically attach probative weight to the document. Dalek Nig. Ltd V. OMPADEC (2007) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1033) 402.

In estimating the weight to be attached to a statement rendered admissible as evidence, regard is made to all the circumstances from which any inference can reasonably be drawn by the court as to the accuracy or otherwise of the statement. Section 34(1) Evidence Act, 2011