Edo tribunal gives third judgment, dismisses PDP, Ighodalo’s petition against Okpebholo’s election

For the third time on Wednesday, the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja has dismissed the petition filed by the People’s Democratic Party and its candidate, Asuerime Ighodalo, challenging the victory of Gov. Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress.

The tribunal affirmed Okpebholo as the valid winner of the September 21, 2024 governorship election.

Persecondnews reported that the tribunal had earlier on Wednesday dismissed the petitions of Action Alliance and the Accord Party over the disputed poll.

In a unanimous judgment, the three-member panel led by Justice Wilfred Kpochi ruled that the petitioners failed to prove their allegations of over-voting and upheld that Okpebholo secured the highest number of valid votes.

The tribunal also criticised the manner in which the petitioners presented their evidence, stating that it did not sufficiently support their claims.

INEC had declared Okpebholo winner with 291,667 votes, defeating Ighodalo, who garnered 247,655 votes.

Dissatisfied with the results, the PDP and its candidate had approached the tribunal, arguing that the election did not follow the rules set by the Electoral Act of 2022.

In their petition, marked EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, they claimed that Okpebholo did not win the highest number of lawful votes.

They also accused INEC of not properly numbering and pre-recording some sensitive election materials, which they said allowed for rigging in favour of the APC.

The PDP and Ighodalo further alleged that the results in 765 polling units were wrongly calculated.

Persecondnews reported that they presented 19 witnesses and submitted evidences including 153 BVAS machines used in 133 polling units.

They claimed that votes were manipulated at collation centres, leading to over-voting in Okpebholo’s favour.

But in its judgment on Wednesday, the tribunal said the petitioners did not provide enough evidence to prove their case.

It ruled that the burden of proof that Okpebholo was wrongly declared the winner rested on the PDP and Ighodalo.

The panel insisted that the petitioners must prove their cases with solid evidence rather than rely on weaknesses in the opponent’s defence.

It also pointed out that the petitioners introduced new facts not included in their original petition, which were later struck out.

Despite opposition from the respondents, the tribunal accepted the documents presented by petitioners as evidence.

It acknowledged that the petitioners listed the polling units and wards where they claimed irregularities occurred.

The tribunal ruled that the PDP and its candidate only submitted documents without properly explaining them through credible witnesses, which weakened their case, noting that most of the witnesses provided hearsay evidence and that failing to bring polling unit agents, presiding officers, or voters as witnesses seriously hurt their argument.

The tribunal also dismissed their claim that INEC did not follow proper procedures in handling election materials.

It pointed out that none of the BVAS machines presented were turned on to prove that the number of votes recorded in the disputed polling units exceeded the number of accredited voters.

“It is clear that to prove over-voting, you need the Voter Register, BVAS machines, and Form EC8A,” the tribunal stated, adding that the petitioners only provided screenshots of BVAS data rather than the actual devices.

The tribunal concluded that even if the votes the petitioners disputed were removed, Okpebholo would still have won the election.

Persecondnews reports that Ighodalo’s legal team has rejected the judgment, vowing to challenge it at the Court of Appeal.