- Ighodalo, Okpebholo make final submissions
- PDP candidate, Oshiomhole attend proceedings
Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, sitting in Abuja, yesterday reserved judgment in the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the September 21, 2024 governorship election held in the state, challenging the outcome of the election.
PDP and Asue Ighodalo are, in their petition, querying the decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to declare Senator Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as winner of the election, which they claimed was marred by irregularities.
Shortly after lawyers to parties adopted their written addresses and made final submissions, the three-man tribunal, headed by Justice Wilfred Kpochi, announced that the date for judgment would be communicated to them.
Lawyer to the petitioners, Ken Mozia (SAN), in his final submission, contended that his clients had successfully demonstrated electoral malpractices in 765 polling units out of 4,519 across the state.
He noted discrepancies at various collation levels, where figures on Form EC8A (polling unit results) were allegedly reduced at the ward and local government collation stages (EC8B).
The petitioners’ lawyer added that INEC certified all documents tendered by the petitioners, but failed to present any counter-evidence.
He said: “The issue is not about producing an alternative result, but about questioning the validity of the INEC Result Viewing (IReV) portal uploads.”
Mozia argued that election petitions should be determined by the impact of irregularities on the process, not just the percentage of affected polling units.
He then prayed the tribunal to grant all the reliefs in the petition, including the voiding of Okpebholo’s victory.
Lawyer to INEC, Kanu Agabi (SAN), argued that the petition lacked merit, arguing that the tribunal could not annul the election because that was not the relief sought by the petitioners.
Agabi also argued that the tribunal could not declare that the petitioners were the winners of the election in the light of their assertion that the election was invalid.
He contended that the ground of non-compliance pleaded by the petitioners was not accompanied by the appropriate consequential relief, which would have been for the annulment of the election, adding that that ground was incompetent.
Agabi argued that the number of polling unit agents invited as witnesses by the petitioners was insignificant to represent the number of polling units in Edo State.
He claimed that the case of the petitioners was founded on analysis of documents and not what happened on the field on the day of the election.
Counsel for Okpebholo, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), described the petition as an “academic exercise,” arguing that the documents tendered by the petitioners, including Forms EC25B and EC40A, were “dumped in the court” without proper demonstration of their relevance.
He urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition.
Lawyer to the APC, Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), made similar arguments and prayed the tribunal to reject the petition.
Reacting to the day’s proceedings, a PDP chieftain in Edo State, Ogbeide Ifaluyi-Isibor, expressed satisfaction with the proceedings, adding that the petitioners were confident of a positive outcome.
Ifaluyi-Isibor noted that the testimonies of the petitioners’ witnesses aligned with their claims, particularly concerning allegations of over-voting and incorrect collation of results in several polling units.
He argued that the number of witnesses presented did not always determine the strength of an election petition, citing Supreme Court decisions that place greater weight on the substance of evidence, rather than the volume of testimonies.
He added: “The petitioners are pleased with the proceedings of the court so far. Our counsel effectively demonstrated that testimonies given by witnesses were in consonance with our prayers.
“We are contesting results in 756 polling units out of over 4,000 in the state. Our arguments before the tribunal were clear, and we believe we have sufficiently substantiated our claims.”
Equally reacting, former APC national chairman and ex-governor of Edo State, Sen. Adams Oshiomhole, said he was not convinced that the petitioners did enough to warrant the cancellation of the election.
Oshiomhole, who witnessed the tribunal’s proceedings yesterday, argued that “it is the duty of the petitioners to prove their allegations beyond doubt.
“I am satisfied with how the hearing went, but only the tribunal can determine the outcome.”
The PDP candidate, Ighodalo, who also witnessed the proceedings, declined to comment when approached by reporters.
