Some housewives in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, have stopped using tomatoes for stew and other sauces over rise in cost.

The residents, who made this known in interviews with the News Agency of Nigeria(NAN), said they resorted to using garden eggplants and carrots for stew.

They said garden egg, called ganyen gauta in Hausa, igba in Yoruba and anyara in Igbo, could blend very well with rice in the same manner as tomatoes.

Others said they were exploring pumpkin, pawpaw or traditional soups like white soup and palm fruit soup popularly called banga in place of tomatoes stew.

Mrs Jumai Amodu, a mother of five, said a week without rice with tomatoes stew was unfulfilling for her and the family.

She said rice with stew was a regular on their menu, adding that “there is an unexplainable satisfaction that comes with taking cooked rice and stew.”

The mother of five, however, said with the scarcity and high cost of tomatoes, her family was exploring garden egg stew.

Amodu said, “since tomatoes became very expensive, we decided to use garden egg for stew and it is as sweet as tomato stew.

“The only major difference between garden egg stew and tomatoes stew is the colour. We also use pumpkin stew with rice sometimes and although it has its unique taste, it blends well with rice.”

Mrs Helen Omo, a businesswoman, said although tomatoes stew was an important recipe in almost all homes in Nigeria, its scarcity had made some Nigerians to think of alternatives.

“I went to the market yesterday to get some tomatoes for stew and a sizeable bushel, which costs between N2,000 and N2,500 was being sold for as much as N6,500.

“I did not bother to haggle the price because it was way beyond my budget,” she said.

Chinedu, an entrepreneur, told NAN that he enjoyed taking rice with pepper soup or white soup.

“The prices of all food stuff have gone up but that of tomatoes is outrageous probably because it is tomatoes off-season.

“Besides being expensive, it is very scarce and as a result we decided to explore other recipes,” he said.

Umar Adamu, a tomatoes retailer in Nyanya market, said he has stopped retailing tomatoes for some days due to low patronage.

He said customers were not “patronising him because of the high cost.”

Mrs Rukkaya Umar, Chief Executive Officer, Abraks Farm Produce Nigeria Limited, said the major reason for scarcity of tomatoes was high cost of fertiliser.

According to her, many tomato farmers do not grow it because they cannot afford fertiliser, adding that fertiliser was critical to its growth.

Umar also said reliance on seasonal farming was one of the reasons for the scarcity, adding that it was tomatoes off-season.

“Most farmers in Nigeria still do seasonal farming and that is contributing greatly to scarcity of farm produce particularly in their off-seasons,” she said.

A sizeable basket of tomatoes which hitherto sold for about N10,000 now sells for about N35,000 while big baskets cost more.

 

Daily Trust

Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), on Monday, closed its case after calling a witness in Atiku Abubakar’s petition contesting the election of President Bola Tinubu on 25 February.

Atiku of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is urging the Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja to set aside Tinubu’s victory on account of gross non-compliance with Nigeria’s electoral laws in the conduct of the presidential poll.

INEC on 1 March declared Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) election winner.

At the resumed proceedings on Monday, INEC’s lawyer, Abubakar Mahmoud, called the first witness, Lawrence Bayode, an assistant director in charge of INEC’s ICT department.

Bayode, an IT expert with over two decades of work experience at INEC, adopted his witness statement on oath.

He was led in evidence by Abubakar Mahmoud, INEC’s lead counsel.

Mahmoud tendered a set of documents comprising letters from the APC and addressed to the electoral commission, announcing the withdrawal of Kashim Shettima from the Borno Central Senatorial District elect.

Tinubu subsequently chose Shettima as his vice presidential pick.

But Atiku’s lawyer, Chris Uche, objected to the admissibility of the documents, while Wole Olanipekun, Tinubu’s lawyer and APC’s counsel, Lateef Fagbemi, did not object to the court’s admissibility of INEC’s documents.

Testimony

Afterwards, Olanipekun and Fagbemi took turns to cross-examine Bayode concerning the electoral umpire’s deployment of the Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS) machines for the presidential election.

Responding to Olanipekun’s inquiry, Bayode said, “Images captured on BVAS machines required data services for them to be uploaded (on the Internet).”

He, however, clarified that photographic copies of polling stations results “captured on BVAS whether transmitted manually or electronically does not affect the integrity of an election.”

The witness noted that “the presidential election conducted by INEC and won by the second respondent (Tinubu) was free, fair and in substantial compliance with the electoral act.”

Under cross-examination by Fagbemi, Bayode explained that “the glitch on the day of (the presidential) election did not affect the actual scores of the candidates at the election as results of each candidate remained the same.”

He added that there was no electronic collation of results after the ballot, as it was done manually.

Fagbemi further drew the witness’ attention to a pre-election notice by INEC, stating that electronic collation of results was not feasible, which Bayode answered in the affirmative.

Specifically, the notice was issued on 23 February, three days to the Presidential election, and published in the Nigerian Tribune Newspaper.

Subsequently, a certified true copy of the newspaper publication containing INEC heads-up regarding the electronic collation of results was tendered and admitted in evidence.

But Uche objected to its admissibility.

The commission’s inability to transmit the presidential election results from polling units across the country in real-time forms one of the key issues before the court for determination.

Labour Party’s presidential candidate, Peter Obi, is equally challenging the outcome of the presidential election based on INEC’s failure to electronically transmit polling units results to its Results Viewing portal for public access.

 

PT

Presidential Election Petition Court has admitted the final report of the European Union Election Observer Mission in Nigeria which faulted the conduct of the February 25 presidential election.

A five-member panel of the court presided by Haruna Tsammani admitted the document yesterday after it was tendered by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar.

Lawyers to President Bola Tinubu, Wole Olanipekun, the All Progressive Congress (APC) Lateef Fagbemi, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Abubakar Mahmoud objected to the admissibility of the document.

The EU mission had in its report claimed the presidential election did not show credibility, fairness and transparency in its conduct by INEC with only 31 percent of the results uploaded on IREV.

 

Daily Trust

Militant leader, Asari Dokubo, has bragged that President Muhammadu Buhari hired him to protect the Abuja-Kaduna highway.

The highway gained a reputation for being unsafe for travelers during the Buhari-led administration, due to frequent kidnappings and murders.

But in the twilight of the immediate past government, reports of violence crashed significantly.

When he visited President Bola Tinubu at Aso Rock last month, Dokubo had boasted that his men were the ones responsible for the stability being enjoyed on that axis.

He had said: “There is a full-scale war going on and the blackmail of the Nigerian state by the Nigerian military is shameful. They said they do not have enough armament and people listen to this false narrative. They are lying. They are liars. I repeat they are liars because I am a participant.

“I am a participant in this war. I fight on the side of the government of the Nigerian state in Plateau, Niger, Anambra, Imo, Abia and Rivers. And in Abuja today, you are travelling to Kaduna on this road. It is not the army that makes it possible for you to travel to Abuja or travel to Kaduna, and vice versa. It is my men, employed by the government of the Nigerian state, stationed in Niger.

“Today, you travel to Baga, you go to Shiroro, you go to Wase. We have lost so many men and in all these engagements, we don’t even have one per cent of the armament deployed by the Nigerian military. One per cent and we have had resounding success. So, this blackmail must end. They (Nigerian Army) has enough resources to fight. Instead of fighting, they are busy stealing. They are busy making the government spend unnecessarily.”

Dokubo also accused the military of oil theft, but while the armed forces debunked the allegation, there was no official response to the issue of securing Abuja-Kaduna highway.

In a newly released video, Dokubo again bragged that peace and stability returned to the road through his intervention.

He said though he was not in good terms with Buhari for a larger part of his administration, the ex-President saw potentials in him and gave him a crucial task.

“If the Buhari-led government can engage me to bring safety for the people on the Abuja-Kaduna road, it should be commended. Do you know how many lives were saved? Do you know how many people were brought out from depression and trauma? Have you ever spoken to people who have been kidnapped?…,” he said.

“We did not employ ourselves. The government saw the potential in us and knowing that we can deliver and they engaged us. That the Buhari government engaged me shows that they know who I am. I was not a friend of Buhari. For Seven years, I was anti-Buhari. Buhari with all that saw the capacity in me that I am capable and the government came.”

Efforts to get the reaction of Garba Shehu, ex-spokesman to Buhari, were not successful as of the time of filing this report as he declined calls put through to him.

 

Daily Trust

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine keeps no secrets from CIA – Zelensky

Kiev does not keep “any secrets” from the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), President Vladimir Zelensky has admitted. He made the remarks in an exclusive interview with CNN, aired on Monday, expressing “surprise” that his recent meeting with CIA boss William Burns got into the media limelight.

“My communication with the CIA chief should always be behind the scenes. We discuss important things – what Ukraine needs and how Ukraine is prepared to act,” Zelensky stated.

Kiev remains in close cooperation with the American spy agency, Zelensky admitted, adding that the country virtually has no secrets from the CIA. Ukrainian spy agencies maintain contacts with the CIA, he added, without specifying the agencies in question.

We don’t have any secrets from the CIA because we have good relations and our intelligence services talk with each other.

“The situation is pretty straightforward. We have good relations with the CIA chief, and we are talking. I told him about all the important things related to the battlefield that we need,” Zelensky explained.

Media in America reported on Burns’ most recent visit of the to Kiev over the weekend. Apart from meeting Zelensky himself, the agency director was said to have also held talks with unspecified Ukrainian intelligence officials.

“Director Burns recently traveled to Ukraine, as he has done regularly since the beginning of Russia’s recent aggression more than a year ago,”an anonymous US official told CNN. “As with other trips, the director met with his Ukrainian intelligence counterparts and President Zelensky, reaffirming the US commitment to sharing intelligence to help Ukraine defend against Russian aggression.”

Apart from acknowledging Kiev’s close ties with the CIA, Zelensky reiterated his war goals, once again pledging to conquer the Crimean Peninsula. Crimea split from Ukraine in the aftermath of the 2014 Maidan coup, voting overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia in a referendum.

“We cannot imagine Ukraine without Crimea. And while Crimea is under Russian occupation, it means only one thing: the war is not over yet,”Zelensky stressed, adding that any scenario without seizing Crimea from Russia would not count as a “victory” for the country.

** Russian forces destroy all Leopard tanks supplied to Kiev by Poland, Portugal — Shoigu

Russian forces wiped out 16 German-made Leopard tanks or actually 100% of this armor supplied to the Kiev regime by Poland and Portugal, Russia’s Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said at a conference call with military commanders on Monday.

"In the south Donetsk, Zaporozhye and Donetsk directions alone where Ukrainian armed formations are undertaking unsuccessful attacks, the groupings of Russian forces destroyed 15 aircraft, three helicopters and 920 pieces of armor, including 16 Leopard tanks. This is actually 100% of the tanks of this type supplied by Poland and Portugal," the defense chief said.

The Russian armed forces continue effectively inflicting damage on the enemy by firepower, which considerably diminishes its offensive potential, Shoigu said.

In all, Ukrainian troops have lost about 2,500 various armaments in all directions since June 4. In addition, Russian air defense forces intercepted 158 rockets of the US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket system and 25 Storm Shadow cruise missiles over the past month, the defense chief said.

The enemy has not achieved its objectives in any of the frontline sectors, which testifies to the skills of Russian fighters and "clearly too high expectations from much-touted Western weapons," Shoigu said.

Ukrainian troops have been employing German-made Leopard tanks since they launched their counteroffensive on June 4. The Russian Defense Ministry has repeatedly reported the destruction of these tanks.

 

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Russia's electronic warriors are intercepting Ukrainian troops' communications and jamming their GPS-guided bombs, experts say

Russian jamming has become so effective that Ukraine — as well as the US and NATO — can no longer assume that Joint Direct Attack Munition glide bombs and other smart weapons will hit their targets.

That's the conclusion of an analysis by Britain's Royal United Services Institute. "Jamming is not causing the JDAMs to stop working, but it is risking their accuracy," according to RUSI researcher Thomas Withington.

While anti-jamming upgrades to JDAM may mitigate the problem, Russian electronic-warfare systems can simply drown out the GPS guidance signal from satellites. "The problem may well be the sheer power of the jamming signal that can be brought to bear," Withington said.

The warning comes after Pentagon documents leaked in April revealed concerns that Russian jamming was reducing the accuracy of American guided weapons, including JDAM as well as HIMARS rockets.

The effect on JDAM is particularly significant, as it is arguably the simplest and most cost-effective smart bomb. By attaching fins and a GPS guidance system to cheap, old-fashioned "dumb" bombs, Ukraine could produce long-range guided weapons at a fraction of the cost of special precision-guided munitions that are in short supply.

The JDAM Extended Range bombs sent to Ukraine reportedly have a range of up to 50 miles, allowing launch aircraft to remain safely out of range of Russian air defenses.

These GPS-guided munitions initially offered Ukraine hope of offsetting Russian superiority in manpower and weapons. Indeed, HIMARS proved crucial in Ukraine's limited counteroffensive in summer 2022, as rockets devastated Russian headquarters and supply dumps.

That Russia is developing countermeasures shouldn't be surprising. All weapons eventually lose some effectiveness as the enemy adapts. Nor is it a secret that the Russian military, like its Soviet predecessor, devoted great effort to developing a variety of electronic-warfare systems.

In particular, Withington pointed to the Russian Army's R-330Zh Zhitel, a mobile truck-mounted jamming system specifically designed to disrupt GPS and satellite communications in the 100 MHz to 2 GHz wavebands. "Signals from the U.S. GPS satellites which JDAM kits use are transmitted on wavebands from 1.164 GHz to 1.575 GHz," according to Worthington. "These fall squarely within the R-330Zh's catchment area."

Worthington claims to have seen official documents that put the R-330Zh range at 18.6 miles, with a 10kW-strong jamming signal. This is "notably stronger than the strength of the GPS signal arriving from space," he noted. "Moreover, the closer the GPS receiver is to the R-330Zh's jamming antenna, the stronger the jamming signal becomes."

In theory, the Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module upgrade to JDAM in the early 2000s should ensure that JDAM will only respond to authorized M-Code encrypted military GPS signals. However, Russian jammers may still be able to disrupt the signals through "sheer brute force" jamming beams, Withington said.

Russia could also intercept M-Code signals and retransmit them with slight alterations to a JDAM, causing the bomb to miss. Efforts to bypassing Russian interference by using signals from multiple GPS satellites could in turn be countered by employing multiple jammers.

Russia's counter-GPS efforts are part of a massive electronic-warfare campaign that has also disrupted Ukrainian radio communications and drone operations.

Russian forces "now employ approximately one major EW system per 10 kilometers [6.2 miles] of frontage, usually situated approximately 7 kilometers [4.3 miles] from the frontline," according a recent RUSI report on Russian tactics. This jamming has contributed to a Ukrainian drone loss rate that RUSI estimates to be as high as 10,000 UAVs per month.

According to the RUSI report, Russian EW troops are also "highly capable" at intercepting and decrypting Ukrainian radio communications. In one case, they appeared to intercept and decode an encrypted radio message from Ukrainian troops calling in a fire mission in real time, allowing Russian commanders to send "pre-emptive warning" to their units.

Nonetheless, Russian electronic warfare has limitations. Emitting jamming beams discloses a jammer's location, and Ukraine appears to have located and destroyed Russian systems such as the R-330Zh. Ironically, smothering the airwaves with powerful jamming beams may also be disrupting Russian GPS and radio communications.

"Russia's GLONASS GNSS constellation transmits some signals which are similar to GPS," Withington noted. There is evidence that "the Russian Army regularly suffers electromagnetic fratricide to this end. The force often exhibits scant concern for jamming friendly signals when attacking its enemies."

Jamming hasn't made JDAM obsolete. Like other facets of warfare, electronic warfare is like a chess game, where move is followed by countermove. Either way, US engineers "may have to rethink how they safeguard JDAMs for the wars of tomorrow, based on the conflicts of today," said Withington.

** Moscow says 700,000 children from Ukraine conflict zones now in Russia

Russia has brought some 700,000 children from the conflict zones in Ukraine into Russian territory, Grigory Karasin, head of the international committee in the Federation Council, Russia's upper house of parliament, said late on Sunday.

"In recent years, 700,000 children have found refuge with us, fleeing the bombing and shelling from the conflict areas in Ukraine," Karasin wrote on his Telegram messaging channel.

Russia launched a full-scale invasion on its western neighbour Ukraine in February 2022. Moscow says its programme of bringing children from Ukraine into Russian territory is to protect orphans and children abandoned in the conflict zone.

However, Ukraine says many children have been illegally deported and the United States says thousands of children have been forcibly removed from their homes.

Most of the movement of people and children occurred in the first few months of the war and before Ukraine started its major counter offensive to regain occupied territories in the east and south in late August.

In July 2022, the United States estimated that Russia "forcibly deported"260,000 children, while Ukraine's Ministry of Integration of Occupied Territories, says 19,492 Ukrainian children are currently considered illegally deported.

 

RT/Tass/Business Insider/Reuters

The question goes: "A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?"

Is your knee-jerk response that the ball costs 10 cents? That is a common answer, but also an incorrect one.

If the ball costs 10 cents, then the bat would cost $1.10, which would bring the total to $1.20. The correct answer is the ball costs 5 cents and the bat $1.05. 

This question is part of the Cognitive Reflection Test, CRT, which was first described in 2005 by psychologist Shane Fredrick. Fredrick wanted to examine how people fight, or don't fight, their intuitive thinking.

The original test contained two additional questions:

If it takes 5 machines 5 minutes to make 5 widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?

In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?

Research about whether the test measures cognitive ability, or intelligence, has been mixed. 

However, why so many people get it wrong is due to a psychological trap we all fall into sometimes. This same psychological trap can hinder our ability to make sound decisions.

Why so many people get this math problem wrong 

We think in two distinct ways: Psychologists refer to these cognitive processes as System 1 and System 2. System 1 is your initial reaction, which is often made quickly and without reflection. System 2 is when you use conscious thought and effort. Daniel Kahneman popularized this idea in his bestselling book "Thinking, Fast and Slow."

For System 2 to kick in, you must realize that System 1 did not produce the right answer. 

For some people, the intuitive answer is the ball costs 10 cents. In order to come to the correct answer, you need to realize that System 1 didn't work, and assess the problem again. 

Giving people another chance to solve a problem, though, doesn't automatically mean they will get it right.

Even when given two chances, many people remain loyal to their knee-jerk answer, according to a recent study. In the experiment, researchers gave participants 50 versions of the bat-and-ball problem.

Participants had to first give their System 1 answer, or their initial hunch, and then were allowed to give a System 2 answer, which was supposed to be more thought-through.

"Results showed that both people's first hunches and the responses they gave after deliberation predominantly remained biased from start to finish," the study reads. "But in the rare cases in which participants did learn to correct themselves, they immediately managed to apply the solution strategy and gave a correct hunch on the subsequent problems." 

While making decisions, it's important to not always go with your hunch. Re-evaluate your choice, even if your intuition is telling you that you made the right one, and reflect on whether you are actually analyzing the problem or just looking for the easiest answer.

 

CNBC

 

 

Collaboration. Businesses want it. Governments want it. Leaders frequently invoke the word whenever a formidable challenge emerges. 

What better way to serve customers, respond to threats, and deal nimbly with unexpected events (say, a worldwide pandemic) than to bring together different parts of an organization? 

Maybe you have found in your own experience, though, that the desire to collaborate does not always translate into positive results. In fact, all too many collaborative efforts fall apart because of a natural human tendency to be territorial. 

Understandably, people identify most strongly with the people they already know and work with on their teams. And so, in the face of requests to join forces, these smaller groups all too often build up silos to protect their own people and resources. 

Let me give you an extreme - and tragic - example. Before 9/11 happened, the FBI actually had enough information to prevent the attack. For example, a flight simulator school near Minneapolis reported suspicious behavior by one of its students to the local FBI. 

In addition, a special agent in Phoenix, learning of similarly suspicious activity in Arizona, sent a July 2001 memo to a dozen FBI officials recommending that the agency compile a worldwide list of aviation schools. 

But because local and federal FBI offices tended to build silos within their regions that shielded knowledge from each other rather than sharing it, this information failed to reach those who could have acted on it. Nor was anyone in a position to connect the proverbial dots. 

Since then, the FBI has worked hard to adopt a more collaborative approach, all the way from the local level to the highest reaches of the federal government. In a series of cases on the transformation of the FBI, a colleague and I documented how silos inevitably develop and how best to defuse their negative influence.

Whether you work for a business or a government agency, a military organization or a nonprofit, you'll need to be on the lookout for silos. You'd think that a small business might be an exception to this, but that's not true. It all starts with a simple division of labor where a group of individuals divides up tasks. 

Very quickly they create silos that then need to be coordinated. Even five or ten people can construct a silo to protect themselves and their turf, creating their own set of subcultures and sub-identities.

Given that silo building is natural human behavior, how can organizations respond to it? Back in 2007, I wrote an article for the Harvard Business Review called "Silo Busting." (I also discussed this concept in my 2010 book, "Reorganize for Resilience": Putting Customers at the Center of Your Business.")

In retrospect, the title "Silo Busting" was a misnomer, because we actually need silos. They are a valuable source of expertise, accountability and focus. However, given that they tend to become self-isolating and protectionist, leaders must take steps to build bridges between the silos within their organizations. 

How can they do that? 

Many leaders think it is enough to coordinate a response through such methods as creating task forces and working groups, and assigning common leaders for these groups. But without true cooperation among disparate groups, these efforts cannot be successful. 

These are two very distinct and complementary facets of collaboration. Without both, you are likely to fail. At first glance, it might seem like coordination and cooperation are basically the same thing, but that is not the case. 

Cooperation is about instilling a shared intention across an organization, through vehicles like a collaborative culture and a shared sense of purpose. Coordination is about aligning that intention and purpose to specific tasks.

I have found that leaders over-rely on coordination because it looks so tangible and implies immediate results. But coordination needs to meld with the energy of true cooperation in order to meet an overarching objective. 

Absent cooperation, you will end up with a patchwork solution that isn't sustainable over the long haul. Melding these two components of collaboration is far from easy. 

Cooperation ultimately happens between individuals, and no amount of initiatives or projects can guarantee individual buy-in. 

I have found that company leaders can improve their chances of success if they place a greater value on multi-domain skills (the ability to work with a variety of products and services) and boundary-spanning skills (the ability to create connections between disparate parts of an organization. 

This means leaders should reward and promote more generalists - a stark contrast to a continuing tendency to favor those with specialized expertise. Why is it important to understand these concepts? 

Because in this time of unprecedented uncertainty and turbulence, only those who respond with the most agility to unexpected events are likely to come out ahead. The most agile players will be able to swiftly marshal their entire organization in a united response. The laggards will become so caught up in internal conflicts that it paralyzes them. 

As noted in a management paper that I co-authored: "At best, conflicting interests can cause diminished commitment that gradually withers the relationship; at worst, they can lead to opportunism or the pursuit of self-interest with no regard for unenforceable commitments or moral obligations."

How can leaders build agility into their operating systems? By recognizing that internal silos will, at least initially, seek to optimize for their own internal benefit. A powerful way to counteract this is to harness purpose as a key enabler of cooperation. 

Leaders will need to create a narrative that, while acknowledging silos, stresses and celebrates a shared purpose across the entire organization. From there, specific steps to carry out that purpose will be easier to accomplish. Only with an understanding of these nuances will organizations be able to thrive. 

As Babe Ruth once said: "You may have the greatest bunch of individual stars in the world, but if they don't play together, the club won't be worth a dime." In baseball, as in business and beyond, playing together successfully depends on the right mix of cooperation and coordination. 

 

Inc

The defendant in a recent case from the Court of King’s Bench for Saskatchewan, Western Canada, may well be giving a “thumbs down” after the judge concluded that a thumbs-up (????) emoji constituted acceptance of a contract to sell 87 metric tonnes of flax.

On June 8, 2023, Justice T.J. Keene granted a summary judgment decisionin favour of grain buyer South West Terminal Ltd, writing, “There was a valid contract between the parties that the defendant breached by failing to deliver the flax.”

He ordered seller Achter Land & Cattle Ltd. to pay damages of more than $82,000, representing the costs borne by SWT, to go into the spot market at a higher price to make good on its own contracts with clients.

Emoji is an unconventional but valid way to sign a contract

“This court readily acknowledges that a ???? emoji is a non-traditional means to “sign” a document, but nevertheless, under these circumstances, this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a “signature” – to identify the signator (with a unique cell phone number) and . . . to convey Achter’s acceptance of the flax contract.”

MLT Aikins LLP partner Josh Morrison, whose firm handled the case for the plaintiff, said, “From the day we were approached, we thought it was a really interesting case – a classic law school question.”

“It’s basic contract formation. And then layered over it is the Sale of Goods Act, 

the Electronic Information and Documents Act, and common law issues. It had some unique wrinkles.”

After discussing and agreeing to a flax contract over the phone, a representative for SWT, Kent Mickleborough, texted Chris Achter, the representative for flax seller Achter Land, a photo of the contract on March 26, 2021, along with the text message: “Please confirm flax contract.”

Mickleborough had phoned Chris Achter after Chris’s father, Bob, had expressed interest in a flax contact after seeing an email blast from SWT asking for possible suppliers looking to sell flax.

The contract was for 87 metric tonnes of flax at $669.17 per tonne, or $17 a bushel, to be delivered to SWT in November 2021.

The Achter representative texted back a thumbs-up emoji, which the buyer understood to be acceptance of the contract by the seller. However, Achter Land failed to deliver the flax in November.

In this case, one of the critical details was that before the dispute, the parties had a longstanding business relationship. They had previously similarly entered several contracts, with a photo of the contract texted to Achter and accepted via text message. Achter had always accepted those contracts by text message using short affirmative phrases such as: “Looks good,” “OK,” and “Yup.”

Mickleborough gave evidence that he would “primarily deal with Chris” when negotiating contracts with Achter. “We would typically have a conversation, either in person or over the telephone, and agree on a price and volume of grain, then Chris would ask me to write up the contract and send it out to him. I have done approximately fifteen to twenty contracts with Achter Ltd. during my time with SWT.”

While this procedure was used before the pandemic, Mickleborough noted that using phones and text became more common after Covid-19 arrived.

For instance, on July 14, 2020, Mickleborough said that after discussing and agreeing on a contract with Chris Achter, he prepared a contract for the sale of 185 metric [tonnes] of durum wheat from Achter to SWT for a price of $312.31 per tonne. “I signed the contract and then took a photo of it using my cell phone and sent it to Chris, with the message ‘Please confirm terms of durum contract.’ Chris texted me back: ‘Looks good.’”

Mickleborough said that at the time, he understood “this to be that Chris was agreeing to the contract, and this was his way of [signalling] that agreement.”

The judge wrote in his decision he found the flax contract to be very similar to this and other durum wheat contracts the two parties had, “the only difference being the use of the word flax instead of the word durum, and this time instead of words like ‘OK,’ ‘yup’ or ‘looks good’ being texted by Chris, a commonly used ???? emoji was texted by Chris.”

A different version of events

Chris Achter’s version of events differs, saying that most previous contracts with SWT involved selling grain already harvested and ready for delivery shortly. “In other words, we would agree to the sale of grain, and delivery would be completed within the next few weeks.”

However, he said that whenever grain still needs to be produced, he insists on an “Act of God” clause so he is not bound to deliver grain that he cannot produce due to circumstances outside his control.

In this case, Chris Achter said it was a busy time of year, so particulars of the flax contract were not discussed, but he expected that the contract would be a production contract with an Act of God clause to protect him if the crop was damaged by hail or drought.

Achter said the thumbs-up emoji simply confirmed he had received the Flax contract. “It was not a confirmation that I agreed with the terms of the flax contract. The full terms and conditions of the flax Contract were not sent to me, and I understood that the complete contract would follow by fax or email for me to review and sign.

He denied the thumbs up emoji as a digital signature of the incomplete contract."I did not have time to review the flax contract and merely wanted to indicate that I did receive his text message. I did not and would not have entered into the flax contract without first reviewing the terms and conditions with specific reference to the Act of God clause.”

What would an objective bystander conclude?

Justice Keene noted that to form a contract, there must be an offer by one party that is accepted by another party to create a legal relationship. However, he noted the test for agreeing to a contract for legal purposes is not whether the parties to the contract subjectively believed they were entering into a contract. Instead, it is whether an objective, reasonable bystander would conclude that the parties had entered into a contractual agreement.

The judge found that when the Achter replied with the thumbs-up emoji, a “reasonable bystander” knowing all the background would “come to the objective understanding the parties had reached . . . a meeting of the minds, just like they had done on numerous other occasions.”

Keene wrote: “In short, what we have is an uncontested pattern of entering into what both parties knew and accepted to be valid and binding deferred delivery purchase contracts. The parties clearly understood these curt words were meant to be confirmation of the contract and not a mere acknowledgement of the receipt of the contract by Chris.”

In determining damages, Keene noted the difference between the contract price of $17 a bushel ($669.26 a tonne) and the price of flax on November 30, 2021, the last day for delivery under the contract terms ($41 a bushel or $1,614.09 a tonne), for a difference of $24 a bushel or 944.83 a tonne. He said that multiplying the tonnes by the difference in price amounts to prima facie damages of $82,200.21, apart from interest and costs.

Keene also relied on The Electronic Information and Documents Act of 2000 (“EIDA”). Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, section 18 of the act provides that acceptance of an offer can be expressed by an action in electronic form. Keene ruled the thumbs-up emoji was an electronic form of action capable of expressing acceptance, as contemplated by the EIDA.

The court said the EIDA allows legally recognizing documents in electronic format when legislation requires a “signature” and when documents are “in writing.” Section 14 of the EIDA acknowledges an electronic signature as valid when a signature is required by law.

The court also found that the thumbs-up emoji from Achter’s cellphone number met the legal requirements for an enforceable contract under section 6 of the Sale of Goods Act.

“The legislation is clear. Agreement to contractual terms can be expressed by touching or clicking on an appropriately designated icon or place on a computer screen,” Keene wrote, despite the counsel for the defence’s argument that a simple ???? emoji to signify identity and acceptance would open up a flood of cases coming forward asking for interpretations as to what various emojis mean.

“This appears to be a sort of public policy argument. I agree that this case is novel (at least in Saskatchewan), but nevertheless, this court cannot (nor should it) attempt to stem the tide of technology and common usage – this appears to be the new reality in Canadian society and courts will have to be ready to meet the new challenges that may arise from the use of emojis and the like.”

Even absent specific legislation allowing for the acceptance of electronic signatures, Keene said, “Courts have considered an electronic signature as a valid signature simply under longstanding principles of common law.”

Clarity in communication is key in contracts

MLT Aikins’ Morrison says the decision emphasizes the importance of “recognizing that acceptance of contracts can be expressed electronically, even through seemingly casual means such as an emoji, depending on the context.

“It is a reminder that the subjective intentions of parties are irrelevant when determining a contract’s validity at law. A contract’s validity is determined by assessing the intentions of the parties from the perspective of a reasonable and objective bystander who is aware of all the relevant facts.

The solution, he says, is “clarity in written communication” to avoid disputes before they happen and ensure all parties have a clear understanding of the contractual obligations they are undertaking.”

Morrison also notes that buying and selling grain is speculative, so players may want to keep options open. However, the “serious message” behind these tactics is that keeping options open might still lead to binding legal obligations.

 

Canadian Lawyer

The Presidency has rejected the report of the European Union on the outcome of the 2023 general elections.

In its final report on the Nigerian elections, the globally acclaimed body said trust in the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had been severely damaged, especially as a result of the failure to upload the result of the presidential election electronically.

But responding in a statement on Sunday, Dele Alake, Special Adviser to the President on Special Duties, Communications and Strategy, described the report as a product of a poorly done desk job that relied heavily on few instances of skirmishes in less than 1,000 polling units out of over 176,000 where Nigerians voted on election day. 

He said the report relied more on rumours, hearsay, cocktails of prejudiced and uninformed social media commentaries and opposition talking heads.

Alake said the 2023 general elections, most especially the presidential election, won by President Bola Tinubu/All Progressives Congress, were credible, peaceful, free, fair and the best organised general elections in Nigeria since 1999. 

The presidential spokesman said there was no substantial evidence provided by the European Union or any foreign and local organisation that was viable enough to impeach the integrity of the 2023 election outcomes. 

He said: “We strongly reject, in its entirety, any notion and idea from any organisation, group and individual remotely suggesting that the 2023 election was fraudulent. 

“Our earlier position that the technology-aided 2023 general elections were the most transparent and best organised elections since the return of civil rule in Nigeria has been validated by all non-partisan foreign and local observers such are the African Union, ECOWAS, Commonwealth Observer Mission and the Nigerian Bar Association.

“Unlike EU-EOM that deployed fewer than 50 observers, the Nigerian Bar Association that sent out over 1000 observers spread across the entire country for same election gave a more holistic and accurate assessment of the elections in their own report. 

“NBA, an organisation of eminent lawyers and an important voice within the civic space, reported that 91.8 per cent of Nigerians rated the conduct of the national and state elections as credible and satisfactory. Any election that over 90% of the citizens considered transparent should be celebrated anywhere in the world.

“It is heart-warming that INEC, through its National Commissioner for Information and Voter Education, Festus Okoye, has come out to defend the integrity of the election it conducted by rejecting the false narratives in the EU report.

“It is also gratifying that the electoral umpire, as an institution that is open to learning and continuous improvements, has also committed to taking on board more ideas, innovation and reforms that will further enhance the integrity and credibility of our electoral process.

“As a country, we have put the elections behind us. Tinubu is facing the arduous task of nation-building, while those who have reasons to challenge the process continue to do so through the courts. In just one month in office, Nigerians appear satisfied with the decisive leadership of Tinubu and the manner he is redirecting the country to the path of fiscal sustainability and socio-economic reforms. We urge the EU and other foreign interests to be objective in all their assessments of the internal affairs of our country and allow Nigeria to breathe.

“Sometimes in May, we alerted the nation, through a press statement, to the plan by a continental multi-lateral institution to discredit the 2023 general elections conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission. The main target was the presidential election, clearly and fairly won by the then candidate of All Progressives Congress, Tinubu.

“While we did not mention the name of the organisation in the said statement, we made it abundantly clear to Nigerians how this foreign institution had been unrelenting in its assault on the credibility of the electoral process, the sovereignty of our country and on our ability as a people to organise ourselves. We find it preposterous and unconscionable that in this day and age, any foreign organisation of whatever hue can continue to insist on its own yardstick and assessment as the only way to determine the credibility and transparency of our elections.

“Now that the organisation has submitted what it claimed to be its final report on the elections, we can now categorically let Nigerians and the entire world know that we were not unaware of the machinations of the European Union to sustain its, largely, unfounded bias and claims on the election outcomes.

“It is worth restating that the limitation of EU final assessment and conclusions on our elections was made very bare in the text of the press conference addressed by the Head of its Electoral Observation Mission, Barry Andrews. While addressing journalists in Abuja on the so-called final report, Andrews noted that EU-EOM monitored the pre-election and post-election processes in Nigeria from January 11 to April 11, 2023 as an INEC accredited election monitoring group.

“Within this period, EU-EOM observed the elections through 11 Abuja-based analysts, and 40 election observers spread across 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory. With the level of personnel deployed, which was barely an average of one person per state, we wonder how EU-EOM independently monitored election in over 176,000 polling units across Nigeria.”

 

Daily Trust

After three weeks of legal fireworks sparked by the move by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi to invalidate the outcome of the 23 February election at the Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja, President Bola Tinubu and his party, the All Progressive Congress (APC), are set to open their defence on Monday.

Nigeria’s electoral commission, INEC, also a respondent in the cases pending at the court, will commence its defence of the outcome of the election before the five-member panel of the court headed by Haruna Tsammani on Monday (today).

Tinubu of the APC emerged as Nigeria’s 16th leader in a fiercely contested election on 25 February.

Five petitions were filed at the court to challenge the election outcome in the wake of the announcement of the results. But the number of petitions dropped to three after two were withdrawn by those who filed them.

So far, Atiku, Obi and the Allied Democratic Party (APM) have closed their cases by calling witnesses and tendering documents to support their allegations of widespread irregularities and manipulation of results during the poll.

Specifically, the petitioners accused INEC of rigging the entire process in favour of Tinubu and his APC party.

Proving electoral fraud in Nigeria is a herculean task, owing to the country’s vast electoral field, with 176,974 polling units as of the recent general election.

However, this year’s exercise was distinct owing to the level to which technology was deployed in the conduct of the election. Yet, the final collation and announcement of the presidential election results were delayed for almost one week.

The poll was held on 25 February across many states of the federation, but the exercise was rescheduled in other areas due to violence and logistical issues, leading to INEC’s eventual declaration of Tinubu winner of the poll on 1 March.

Atiku’s outing in court

With a legal team comprising dozens of lawyers, including a battery of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), Atiku called his first witness on 30 May, a day after Tinubu was sworn in as president at Eagle’s Square in Abuja.

Atiku’s legal team, headed by Chris Uche, tendered tons of electoral documents numbering 118 exhibits before the court.

The documents were certified true copies of the results of the presidential election from the 36 states of the country and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

To substantiate his claims, Atiku’s team also presented records of the number of permanent voter cards (PVC) used for the election across the 36 and printouts of data obtained from the Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS) machines- a technology used in the conduct of the election.

The BVAS machines and the INEC Results Viewing (IReV) portal were innovations of the electoral commission to boost Nigeria’s electoral integrity and credibility.

But INEC’s failure to upload the photographic copies of polling station results forms one of the major grounds of the petition.

Key witnesses

In aid of his case, Atiku called subpoenaed, star and expert witnesses totalling 27 at the close of his case on 23 June.

As the subpoenaed witnesses, mostly INEC ad-hoc presiding officers, took the witness box, they alleged that the electoral umpire failed to electronically transmit polling units results of the presidential election in real-time to the INEC Results Viewing (IReV) portal on 25 February when the poll was held.

Two polling unit presiding officers – Friday Egwuma and Grace Timothy – were engaged by INEC to conduct the disputed poll.

But they were subpoenaed by the five-member court based on the request of Atikum

They recounted their experiences at different polling stations where they presided over the election.

According to them, the photographic copies of the results of the National Assembly election, held simultaneously with the presidential poll, were successfully uploaded to the INEC IReV portal.

But they said the attempts to do the same for the presidential election as stipulated in the electoral commission’s guidelines for the conduct of the polls failed.

Another contentious issue before the court is the integrity of data stored on Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BIVAS) machines from the presidential election.

Hitler Nwala, a digital forensic analyst subpoenaed to testify as Atiku’s expert witness, said he inspected and analysed 110 BVAS machines used for the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) election.

Nwala said he found out that INEC deleted results on all BVAS machines he inspected but didn’t know when the deletion was done.

Equally critical at the defence stage of the suits will be Tinubu’s legal team’s capacity to counter allegations of forgery of academic records and impersonation against the president.

At the tail end of the presentation of his case, Atiku called Mike Enahoro-Ebah, a star witness, who narrated how he obtained several documents detailing Tinubu’s biodata.

Enahoro-Ebah, who identified himself as a public interest litigator, told the court that his lawyer in the US obtained Mr Tinubu’s academic records from Chicago State University.

Mr Enahoro-Ebah alleged that there were discrepancies in Tinubu’s academic records both at the Chicago State University and the South West College in the US.

He tendered Tinubu’s transcripts from the South West College in the US. He added that the transcripts, issued in 1977, identified Tinubu as “female.”

The court admitted the documents as exhibits.

In addition, the court admitted a “notarised judgement of criminal forfeiture” of Tinubu’s assets over alleged drug trafficking in the US.

Another star witness in Atiku’s case, Dino Melaye, who is a former senator and PDP candidate in the forthcoming 11 November Kogi State governorship election.

He alleged wrongful computation of the presidential election results while testifying before the court.

Obi’s case

At the court, Obi called 13 out of the 50 witnesses he had proposed to call to prove his case against Tinubu.

In the suit, Obi’s legal team led by Livy Uzoukwu, tendered several electoral documents comprising BVAS reports, IRev reports, video exhibits, polling stations results, Vice President Kashim Shettima’s nomination form, a copy of $460,000 forfeiture judgment, reports of polling stations where elections did not hold and record of PVCs collected.

Witnesses

Contrary to INEC’s claim, Obi’s expert witness, Mpeh Ogar, told the court that a report of the health status of Amazon Web Services, which hosts the INEC IReV portal, showed no technical glitches on 25 February 2023.

Ogar, a cloud engineer and architect at Amazon Web Services Incorporated, said the INEC’s IReV portal did not experience any glitches to justify the failure to upload real-time the polling unit results of the 25 February presidential election.

The commission had, in a statement issued a day after the polls by its Commissioner for Voter Education, Festus Okoye, blamed unexpected technical glitches for the commission’s inability to ensure real-time uploading of results to the IReV portal as provided in the guidelines for the election

Obi and his party had alleged that INEC’s inability to upload the photographic copies of result sheets from polling stations to the IReV portal in real-time during the election was one of the breaches that marred the polls.

Another witness, Lawrence Nwakaeti, a lawyer from Anambra State, told the court that Tinubu was fined in the US for allegedly trafficking in narcotics.

Obi’s lawyer, Jibrin Okutepa, tendered some court documents purporting to be the US court’s decision awarding $460,000 fine against Tinubu for illicit drugs trafficking imposed by the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

A thread that runs through the narratives of many of the witnesses that testified for Atiku and Obi was the failure of INEC to promptly upload photographic copies of polling units’ presidential election results.

APM’s case

Meanwhile, the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) concluded its case after calling one witness to prove its petition against INEC, Tinubu and the APC.

Its case involved an alleged double nomination against Shettima as Mr Tinubu’s running mate in the presidential election.

Expectations

As proceedings are due to continue on Monday, the respondents – Tinubu and the APC have one week to prove their case, while INEC has five days to defend its case.

Based on the report of the prehearing sessions, Tinubu’s lead lawyer, Wole Olanipekun, had said he was prepared to defend his client’s victory with a total of 39 witnesses in all the pending cases.

The APC, represented by Lateef Fagbemi, disclosed that the party would present 25 witnesses to defend its victory.

While on its part, INEC informed the court that it would call two witnesses.

 

PT