The EC8D reproduction
The state values reproduce the collation result for the four named parties. Grade B reflects a corroborated table without a direct scanned EC8D form in the current register.
Final state result · South South · Two-layer record
Cross River 2023 presidential election result
The reproduced Cross River EC8D collation records LP first with 179,917 votes and APC second with 130,520. The declared margin was 49,397 votes. Mundx presents that state declaration beside, but never merged with, a four-party polling-unit research layer.
Result of record: the reproduced state collation. Research evidence: selected PU observations for APC, LP, PDP and NNPP under a documented policy.
Cross River reconciliation
Declared totals beside selected PU observations
The declared four-party collation totals 407,506. The canonical PU layer totals 398,692, which is 97.8% of the declared figure and 8,814 below it.
| Party / scope | Declared collation | PU rollup | Declared minus PU | PU as % declared |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| APC | 130,520 | 130,057 | +463 | 99.6% |
| LP | 179,917 | 168,448 | +11,469 | 93.6% |
| PDP | 95,425 | 90,406 | +5,019 | 94.7% |
| NNPP | 1,644 | 9,781 | -8,137 | 595.0% |
| Four-party total | 407,506 | 398,692 | +8,814 | 97.8% |
The difference is descriptive, not causal. “Declared minus canonical PU” equals +8,814 for the four tracked parties. It must not be relabelled as missing votes, invalid votes or fraud: the two layers were created at different stages, and the available record does not establish a single cause.
Local evidence
Polling-unit rollups across 18 Cross River LGAs
These rows are calculated from selected polling-unit records, not declared LGA collation totals. APC leads 8, LP leads 9 and PDP leads 1 of the 18 local rollups. Each LGA name opens its permanent place page with ward and polling-unit context.
| LGA | PU leader | APC | LP | PDP | NNPP | Four-party | PUs represented |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abi | APC | 8,222 | 3,426 | 5,783 | 82 | 17,513 | 120 / 120 |
| Akamkpa | LP | 4,606 | 8,117 | 2,927 | 1,377 | 17,027 | 195 / 195 |
| Akpabuyo | APC | 5,861 | 4,104 | 3,804 | 29 | 13,798 | 145 / 145 |
| Bakassi | LP | 183 | 326 | 167 | 0 | 676 | 70 / 70 |
| Bekwarra | LP | 4,713 | 8,123 | 4,787 | 138 | 17,761 | 127 / 127 |
| Biase | APC | 6,293 | 4,544 | 4,508 | 68 | 15,413 | 152 / 152 |
| Boki | APC | 9,964 | 9,224 | 7,659 | 143 | 26,990 | 205 / 205 |
| Calabar Municipality | LP | 6,193 | 40,366 | 3,575 | 1,615 | 51,749 | 334 / 334 |
| Calabar South | LP | 8,164 | 22,063 | 3,797 | 161 | 34,185 | 301 / 301 |
| Etung | APC | 2,519 | 2,229 | 2,086 | 35 | 6,869 | 83 / 83 |
| Ikom | LP | 6,594 | 9,383 | 5,358 | 1,680 | 23,015 | 221 / 221 |
| Obanliku | PDP | 6,422 | 4,134 | 7,049 | 21 | 17,626 | 88 / 88 |
| Obubra | APC | 10,559 | 4,020 | 6,208 | 2,529 | 23,316 | 226 / 226 |
| Obudu | LP | 7,759 | 11,419 | 5,928 | 138 | 25,244 | 255 / 255 |
| Odukpani | APC | 9,765 | 2,736 | 3,779 | 1,276 | 17,556 | 160 / 160 |
| Ogoja | LP | 8,717 | 10,628 | 9,640 | 144 | 29,129 | 178 / 178 |
| Yakurr | LP | 8,217 | 8,606 | 5,311 | 125 | 22,259 | 195 / 195 |
| Yala | APC | 15,306 | 15,000 | 8,040 | 220 | 38,566 | 226 / 226 |
Largest local rollups
Five LGAs in Cross River context
The notes restate the largest local aggregations in prose so their leader, margin and evidence coverage remain legible outside the table. A PU-layer lead is not an official LGA declaration.
- Calabar Municipality: LP leads the selected four-party rollup with 40,366 votes, 34,173 ahead of APC. The local total is 51,749 across 334 represented units. The selected source layer represents every polling unit in the inventory.
- Yala: APC leads the selected four-party rollup with 15,306 votes, 306 ahead of LP. The local total is 38,566 across 226 represented units. The selected source layer represents every polling unit in the inventory.
- Calabar South: LP leads the selected four-party rollup with 22,063 votes, 13,899 ahead of APC. The local total is 34,185 across 301 represented units. The selected source layer represents every polling unit in the inventory.
- Ogoja: LP leads the selected four-party rollup with 10,628 votes, 988 ahead of PDP. The local total is 29,129 across 178 represented units. The selected source layer represents every polling unit in the inventory.
- Boki: APC leads the selected four-party rollup with 9,964 votes, 740 ahead of LP. The local total is 26,990 across 205 represented units. The selected source layer represents every polling unit in the inventory.
Reading the Cross River record
One contest, two evidence layers
The canonical PU layer
All 3,281 polling units in the inventory have a selected four-party observation. Representation does not authenticate each observation, restore the other fourteen parties or reproduce later collation decisions.
The LGA evidence directory
Calabar Municipality has the largest local rollup at 51,749. In Yala, APC leads LP by 306 in the closest proportional margin.
Coverage needs a denominator. The least complete local record is Abi at 100.0% of its inventory. Cite represented and inventory counts when an LGA has unresolved records. Full representation still does not make the rollup an official declaration.
Questions this page answers
Cross River result notes
Who led Cross River in the declared result?
LP led with 179,917 votes. APC followed on 130,520, a margin of 49,397. The four tracked parties total 407,506; that subtotal is not the complete eighteen-party vote.
What does the local pattern show?
APC leads 8, LP leads 9 and PDP leads 1 of the 18 LGA rollups. State-wide, LP leads the PU layer with 168,448 of 398,692 four-party votes, 38,391 ahead of APC. This does not revise the declared leader.
Why can the declared and PU totals differ?
EC8D is a state collation product. Mundx selects complete four-party PU observations, prioritising CCIJ records and then Mark Essien fallbacks. Scope, availability, transcription and later collation steps can differ. The comparison identifies questions; it does not prove a cause.
How should this page be cited?
Use this permanent URL for the Cross River declaration and comparison. Name the layer, year and review date. Cite an LGA place record for a local PU claim, and do not call its PU leader a declared winner without a traceable local collation source.
Provenance
What is official, and what Mundx calculated
The declared layer comes from INEC's result collection and a contemporaneous reproduction of the collation table. It is a collation product, not a sum recreated by Mundx.
Mundx's second layer is a four-party aggregation of selected polling-unit observations. It applies policy all-complete-ccij-first-v1: complete CCIJ records take precedence, then complete Mark Essien records fill remaining units.
- INEC 2023 presidential IReV record.
- State/FCT collation reproduction.
- 176,409 represented units from an inventory of 176,846; 437 remain unresolved nationally.
Canonical PU policy all-complete-ccij-first-v1 · CCIJ commit e38e3bc9a22a
Reuse boundary. Mundx Analytics confirms permission to publish and redistribute the source-derived records in this release. No standard open-data licence or third-party bulk-reuse terms are specified.
Published by Mundx Analytics · reviewed by Mundx Analytics Data Team on 22 September 2026 · official sources retrieved 2026-08-20.