Tag: kwara

The Kwara Central senatorial candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the March 28, 2015, National Assembly elections, Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq, has petitioned the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed and the National Judicial Council (NJC) on the “unjust” ruling of the election petitions tribunal.

In a 13-page petition, which he anchored on six grounds, Abdulrazaq noted that the tribunal overlooked “widespread non-compliance with various provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended) and Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC’s) election regulations and procedures” in arriving at its decision.

The politician accused the three members of the tribunal – Justices Joshua J. Majebi (Chairman), E. G. Omukoro and U. Z. Mohammed – of ignoring the overwhelming evidence his legal team presented, yet slammed a “shameful verdict”.

He said the action of the justices showed alleged bias, misuse of judicial power, brazen breach of his right to fair hearing and miscarriage of justice, dereliction of duty as well as the judges’ alleged “violation of Judicial Oath of office vide the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)”.

Abdulrazaq said he contested the March 28 election against Dr Bukola Saraki of the All Progressives Congress (APC), adding that following INEC’s declaration of Dr Saraki as the winner of the poll, he (Abdulrazaq) and his party filed a petition at the tribunal on April 19, 2015.

According to him, by May 7, “the battle had been fully joined, with Dr Saraki, the APC and INEC as the first, second and third respondents”.

Abdulrazaq said he filed the petition because he, rather than Dr Saraki, “scored majority of the lawful votes cast at the election”.

“Hence, I urged the tribunal to annul Dr Saraki’s alleged victory and declare me the genuine winner, instead. Or, in the alternative, to annul the election altogether and order a fresh poll,” he said.

The PDP candidate said the tribunal adopted five issues for determination at the close of the pre-hearing. These are:

• Some paragraphs in the petition, which Dr Saraki objected to, should not be struck out;
• Allegations of non-compliance by the petition were proven and, if so, whether they substantially affected the outcome of the election;
• The allegations of commission of crimes (electoral misconduct) were proven beyond reasonable doubt;
• The petition was not filed in flagrant violation of relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 and other relevant laws; and
• The petitioners are entitled to any of the reliefs sought.

Abdulrazaq said he personally testified, presented certified true copies (CTC) of the election results which INEC supplied and called three other witnesses, “including the leader of a forensic analysis team that inspected and submitted a four-volume report on all the materials used in the election, polling unit-by-polling-unit, which were all admitted in evidence”.

He said Dr Saraki and INEC neither appeared in person nor call any evidence while APC called one witness, Alhaji Ladi Hassan, who tendered INEC’s Form EC 8D (1) and Form EC 8E (1), both admitted as Exhibits D1 and D2.

The PDP candidate said in the course of the trial, his lawyers tendered what he called undeniable evidence of breaches of the electoral law, rules and procedures, “notably huge over-voting, abuse and misuse of the electronic card reader for voter accreditation which helped Dr Saraki, and other acts that proved his purported victory was predetermined and pre-written”.

According to him, his lawyers established that Alhaji Hassan’s exhibits were forgeries, “which at once rendered the election’s return – the very material basis and fact upon which the tribunal was invited to adjudicate – as plainly fraudulent and thus a nullity”.

Abdurazaq added: “The ‘Summary of Results from Local Government Areas Collation at Senatorial District Level’ or INEC’s Form EC 8D (I), which the tribunal admitted as Exhibit D1, showed it was made on March 28, 2015. So, too, was the resulting ‘Declaration of Result of Election’ or Form EC 8E (I) the tribunal admitted as Exhibit D2 and solely relied upon to dismiss my petition.

“Exhibit D1 – the alleged entire collated results – was signed by Dr Saraki’s party agent, Alhaji Hassan and INEC’s Collation/Returning Officer, Dr (Mrs) Mulkah A. Ahmed alone behind the backs of all other party agents, while the ‘Declaration of Result’ (Exhibit D2) was signed by Dr (Mrs) Ahmed.

“But it turned out that a number of results and the Summary of Results from Polling Units Collation at Registration Area level or Form EC 8B (I) which were admitted as parts of Exhibit P1, were completed on March 21, 2015 – that is, one day after the final result that also included the as yet non-existent figures from Form EC 8B (I) were declared on March 28, 2015.

“All these showed INEC trying to do the impossible – riding two horses in opposite directions simultaneously!

“Now, even a rookie ‘bail-me lawyer’ can figure out that Exhibits D1 and D2 were phony. Alas, their Lordships – Justices Majebi, Omukoro and Mohammed – saw things differently. To justify their laughable decision to dismiss my petition, they held that only the ‘Declaration of Results’ (Exhibit D2) is relevant evidence, whose authenticity they also readily accepted – by assumption.”

Emphasising the essence of his petition to the CJN and why he wanted to get justice, Abdulrazaq said: “In sum, I stand by all our submissions as regards all the issues for determination and state that by reason of those submissions, it is clear the tribunal did not properly consider, let alone evaluate, all the evidence before it; and as such, its conclusions were, with respect, bound to be erroneous and faulty.

“The tribunal failed to appropriately use the documents, which were statutory, as the major barometer for ascribing probative value to the evidence with the law.

“By failing to give proper effect to the documentary evidence and by considering the oral evidence alone or with only passing reference to the documents, the tribunal inevitably drew itself into the path of error and infamy.”

Although the Appeal Court upheld the tribunal’s verdict, the petitioner said he believed the CJN would still investigate the matter to ensure that justice is done.

He said: “I realise that litigation must come to an end at some point, and an aggrieved party should accept judicial rulings in good faith; provided, however, that justice is done and seen to be manifestly done.”

Speaking with our correspondent on phone, Abdulrazaq stressed that he was not accusing the tribunal judges of corruption but of dereliction of duty.

The politician said he was interested in judicial justice because the courts are the last hope of the common man to get justice when he feels cheated in certain circumstances.

He said it was baffling that the tribunal under the justices ignored the evidence he presented to them on merit.

According to him, this is the crux of his contention on his election and not the personalities of the tribunal judges.

Efforts to get the CJN’s reactions have been unsuccessful.

But it was learnt that the NJC had acknowledged receipt of the petition and was working on it.