Asuerinme Ighodalo, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate for the September 21, 2024, Edo State governorship election, announced his intention to appeal to the Supreme Court.
This decision comes after the Court of Appeal in Abuja affirmed Governor Monday Okpebholo’s election on Thursday.
The Court of Appeal’s three-member panel, led by Justice M. A. Danjuma, had dismissed the appeal filed by the PDP and Ighodalo.
This appeal challenged the outcome of the governorship election.
The appellate court found no reason to overturn the May 15 judgment of the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal.
That tribunal had upheld the declaration of Governor Okpebholo, of the All Progressives Congress (APC), as the winner of the gubernatorial election.
Persecondnews recalls that the Justice Wilfred Kpochi-led three-member panel at the tribunal had previously dismissed, due to lack of merit, petitions filed by the PDP and its candidate, the Action Alliance (AA) and its national chairman, Adekunle Rufai Omoaje, as well as a case brought by the Accord Party (AP) and its candidate, Dr. Bright Enabulele.
The tribunal ruled that it found no grounds to nullify the outcome of the governorship election declared in favour of the APC and its candidate, Okpebholo.
The Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC) had declared that Okpebholo of the APC secured a total of 291,667 votes, defeating his closest rival, Ighodalo of the PDP, who garnered 247,655 votes.
Dissatisfied with the result, the petitioners approached the tribunal, alleging that the election was not conducted in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022.
In the petition marked EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, the PDP and its candidate alleged that Governor Okpebholo had not secured the highest number of lawful votes cast in the election.
The petitioners also contended that INEC failed to serialise and pre-record some of the sensitive materials used in the poll, a situation they claimed facilitated the rigging of the election in favour of the APC and its candidate.
Specifically, PDP and its candidate alleged that there was wrong computation of results in 765 polling units in the state, even as they produced 19 witnesses that testified and tendered exhibits before the tribunal.
Among the exhibits tendered by the petitioners before the tribunal were 153 Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVA) machines used in 133 polling units.
The petitioners claimed that results from these polling units were manipulated at the collation centres, leading to over-voting in Okpebholo’s favour.
However, in its judgement, the tribunal held that the petitioners failed to establish, through credible evidence, why the election outcome should be set aside.
It ruled that the burden of proving that Governor Okpebholo was unduly returned by INEC rested squarely on the petitioners, a legal burden that was not successfully discharged.
According to the tribunal, the PDP and its candidate merely dumped exhibits before it without demonstrating them through competent witnesses as required by the law.
It held that most of the petitioners’ witnesses provided hearsay evidence, and the failure to call polling unit agents, presiding officers, or participating voters to testify proved fatal to the petitioners’ case.
The tribunal held that section 137 of the Electoral Act did not preclude the petitioners from producing necessary and competent witnesses to testify in support of their case.
It further dismissed contention of the petitioners that contrary to the provision of section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, INEC failed to pre-record most of the materials that were deployed for the election.
The tribunal held that none of the BVAS machines tendered before it were switched on to demonstrate that the number of votes recorded in the disputed polling units, exceeded the total number of accredited voters.
The appellate court, in its verdict, upheld the tribunal’s decision.
Author
Leave a comment