The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Tribunal

  • Ekiti poll free, fair, INEC witnesses tell tribunal

    A Deputy Director with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Sylvester Aigbogun, yesterday told the Ekiti Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, Apo, Abuja, that the July 14 governorship election  was free and fair.

    Aigbogun, who was the Electoral Officer for Ikole Local Government Area, was testifying for the electoral body in the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the election, Prof. Kolapo Olusola.

    The petitioners sued the INEC, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and Governor Kayode Fayemi, the winner of the election, as respondents before the tribunal.

    They are challenging the declaration of Fayemi as winner of the election by the first respondents, the INEC.

    Aigbogun, during cross-examination by Yomi Aliyu (SAN), counsel for the APC, said his assertion that the election was free and fair was based on what he saw while visiting some polling units in the local government during the election as well as what was presented to him from various units and wards.

    He said: “The election was free and fair. This was based on what I saw and what was presented to me.

    “The PDP and its candidate, Kolapo, did not make any complaint to me on the conduct of the election in my local government.”

    Answering questions from R. O. Balogun (SAN), Fayemi’s counsel,  the witness said APC won in Ikole Local Government Area with 14,522 votes as against PDP’s 13,961.

    He said the election was conducted substantially in line with the Electoral Act and the manual for the election issued by the INEC, which was tendered and admitted as Exhibit RA9.

    The witness said he did not see any presiding officer or other persons deliberately voiding ballot papers during his visit to some polling units.

    Aigbogun told the tribunal during cross-examination by the counsel for the petitioners, Adebayo Adelodun (SAN), that entries on Form EC8A had to tally with those on the pink copy issued to agents of parties at polling units.

    According to him, wherever an alteration in the entries was not initialled by either the presiding officers or collation officers, there was no way he could know that such was an honest mistake.

    Another witness, Akinyemi Shamsudeen, who was the Electoral Officer for Ido-Osi Local Government Area, told the court that he did not receive any complaint from the petitioners on the conduct of the election.

    He said the ad hoc workers for the election were trained to initial mistakes, adding that when they failed to initial such mistakes and there was no complaint from anybody, “I would take it as an honest mistake”.

    Akinyemi said there were no reports from the PDP that there was no compliance with procedural steps, as contained in Exhibit RA9.

    During cross-examination by the petitioners’ counsel, the witness said a void ballot could not be caused by deliberate action.

    He said: “I am not familiar with the word voided as far as our work is concerned.”

    Dada Emmanuel, the Electoral Officer for Ilejemeje Local Government Area, said there were no protests from party agents in the local government.

    According to him, none of the presiding officers who worked under him reported any problem to him.

    Emmanuel also said there was no complaint from the petitioners about the conduct of the election in Ilejemeje Local Government Area, adding that Exhibit RA8, which INEC tendered, was the true result of the July 14 election in his local government.

    During cross-examination by the petitioners’ counsel, he said a void ballot could be the result of deliberate action, though he said voided ballots were not deliberately done by INEC officials.

    Another witness, Kayode Bamidele, the Electoral Officer for Ikere Local Government Area, told the tribunal that there were no irregularities in the election, as stated by the petitioners.

    He said he would be surprised “if anyone says INEC officials deliberately voided ballot papers and thumb-printed ballot papers”.

    Also, the INEC, through its counsel, Charles Uwensuyi-Edosomwan (SAN), tendered as exhibit the certified true copy (CTC) of the Certificate of Return it issued to Governor Fayemi after the election.

    While counsel to the other respondents did not oppose its admissibility, Adelodun said the petitioners had issues with its certification and would address it later.

    The tribunal admitted the document and marked it as Exhibit RA10.

    Tribunal Chairman Justice Suleiman Belgore adjourned till today at the instance of the first respondent.

     

  • Ekiti tribunal chooses Abuja as sitting venue

    …BEGINS WORK ON TUESDAY

     

    The Election Petition Tribunal hearing the dispute arising from the July 14 governorship election has shifted base to Abuja, the nation’s capital.

    The tribunal chaired by Justice Sulaiman Belgore had on Monday ordered the relocation of its sitting from Ado-Ekiti, the state capital, on Monday owing to insecurity at the Ekiti State High Court, the former venue.

    The action followed alleged violence by some party members at the inaugural sitting which put the lives of lawyers, litigants and court workers in jeopardy.

    People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Prof. Kolapo Olusola, are challenging the victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, before the three-man jury.

    Lawyers to all parties at the tribunal demanded the change of venue to Abuja but the panel in its ruling promised to communicate a new venue to them within 48 hours.

    Read Also: Ekiti: APC elders urge Oni to withdraw suit against Fayemi

    Counsel to Dr. Fayemi, Chief Rafiu Balogun and Ekiti PDP Legal Adviser, Mr. Sunday Olowolafe confirmed the change of venue in a telephone chat on Wednesday.

    The Nation reporter saw a copy of the hearing notice communicating the change of venue to Abuja on Wednesday which was signed by the Tribunal Secretary.

    Although the date on the hearing notice read September 24, a member of the Tribunal Secretariat who asked not to be quoted said pre-hearing will commence on Tuesday, September 25.

    It reads: “Take notice that the above-named petition is slated for pre-hearing and will be heard at High Court No 17, Apo FCT High Court, Abuja, before Shoprite Apo, FCT Abuja on Monday, the 24th day of September, 2018 at the hour of 9.00 am forenoon or soon thereafter on such other day as the Tribunal may determine.”

    Balogun had disclosed that the change of the date of commencement of pre-hearing might have been necessitated by the fact that it falls on the day of the opening of a new legal year and swearing-in of the new Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs).

  • Tribunal gives PDP order of substituted service on Fayemi

    The Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State capital, yesterday granted an ex parte order to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to serve the candidate of the All Progressives Congress and Governor-elect, Dr Kayode Fayemi, through substituted means.

    The PDP candidate, Prof Kolapo Olusola, last Friday, filed a 700-page petition challenging the declaration of Fayemi by Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as validly elected.

    The governorship election, which produced Fayemi, was conducted on July 14, but it has become the subject of litigation, following Olusola’s objection to the results.

    At yesterday’s sitting, tribunal’s Chairman, Justice Suleiman Belgore, ordered PDP to paste the service at APC’s office in Ado-Ekiti or convey the message to the respondent through newspaper publications.

    The bailiff had complained he could not effect service on the second and third respondents – APC and Fayemi – as the party’s office in Ajilosun, Ado-Ekiti, was shut and, while the third respondent is out of the country.

    Following the circumstance, the PDP and its candidate, through their legal team, led by Yusuf Ali (SAN), filed a motion ex parte pursuant to paragraphs 8 (2), 47 (1), (2) and 54 of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended), Order 6, Rule 5 of the Federal High Court.

    The motion, moved by Obafemi Adewale, who represented the petitioners, sought the following: “An order of the tribunal granting leave to the petitioners/applicants to bring this application before the pre-hearing session and to hear and determine same accordingly.

  • Ekiti poll: Tribunal grants Fayemi access to electoral materials

    The Ekiti State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Ado-Ekiti, the capital, yesterday granted leave to Governor-elect Kayode Fayemi to inspect and obtain certified true copies (CTC) of polling documents, ballot papers and other electoral materials used in the July 14 election.

    This followed the motion ex-parte filed by Fayemi under Section 151 of the Electoral Act in defence of a petition against his declaration by Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as winner of the poll.

    The reliefs Fayemi is seeking include leave to hear and determine the application for the inspection before pre-hearing session.

    Counsel to Fayemi, who is the third respondent, Mr Abayomi Aliyu (SAN), listed eight grounds upon which the motion ex parte should be granted.

    The lawyer argued that such would enable his client to prepare for necessary defence in the course of the matter.

    Tribunal Chairman Justice Sulaiman Belgore, who reviewed the reliefs sought by Fayemi, held that the tribunal found merit in the application and granted them in the interest of fair hearing.

    The tribunal also granted the respondent’s prayer to allow forensic experts to inspect, by electronic scanning, the ballot papers, voters’ registers and other materials.

    It also granted Fayemi leave to use handwriting experts to inspect statutory forms used for the election.

    Last Friday, the PDP candidate, Prof. Kolapo Olusola, filed over 700 pages of petition challenging Fayemi’s victory.

    He claimed to have scored the highest number of lawful votes cast in the election.

    Fayemi’s application, dated July 31, was anchored on six grounds.

    In his application, the APC candidate said:

    • “That the counsel is seeking the order of the tribunal to see the documents of the election materials.
    • “To make photocopies of the documents of the election materials.
    • “To use forensic equipment to view the handwriting of the election result, and the fingerprint of the election materials.
    • “Request, on the order of the court, to obtain and photocopy all the election materials held on July 14, which is also in custody of the first respondent (PDP).
    • “To seek forensic experts, to access both machine and other materials used in the conduct of the election in order to defend the petition of the first respondent (PDP).
    • “To have all the materials used in all the polling units of the election.”

  • Tribunal dismisses election petitions against Obiano

    The Anambra State Governorship Election Tribunal has dismissed two of the three petitions against the victory of Governor Willie Obiano in the November 18, 2017 election in the state.

    The tribunal affirmed Obiano’s victory in two separate unanimous judgments delivered by its chairman, Justice H.A. Olusiyi.

    Dr Chukwudi Obianaso and Ms Praise Okechukwu, candidates of African Democratic Congress (ADC) and Mega Progressive People Party (MPPP) respectively in the same election had prayed the tribunal to invalidate the victory.

    Obianaso in his petition said the election should be nullified because it was marred with corrupt practices allegedly perpetrated by Obiano and his agents in connivance with INEC.

    “INEC should conduct a fresh election and Obiano be disqualified to contest in the fresh election,” he said.

    In her petition, the MPPP candidate said Obiano was not duly elected or returned by the majority of lawful votes cast and that the exercise did not comply substantially with the Electoral Act.

    “Obiano did not score the majority of valid votes cast in at least two-third of the 21 council areas in Anambra in the election; thus his return by the third respondent is unconstitutional, irregular, null and void and of no effect whatsoever,” she said.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) quoted the tribunal as saying Okechukwu failed to substantiate her claims of electoral malpractice with credible evidence.

    It said those allegedly involved in vote-buying and polling units where the alleged corrupt practices took place were not mentioned, and that only one witness was not enough to testify on the claims.

    “The petitioners have woefully failed to prove by any credible evidence that the first respondent was not duly elected or returned as governor of Anambra by the majority of lawful votes cast.

    “The petitioners have abysmally failed to prove with any modicum of satisfaction that the election in question was invalid by reason of corrupt practices and non-compliance with provisions of Electoral Act 2010 as amended.

    “On the whole, the petition failed as it patently lacks substance and merit, it is accordingly dismissed in its entirety, consequently we affirm as valid the election and return of the first respondent as governor of Anambra,” it ruled.

    On his part, Obianaso hinged his case on the claim that Obiano bought some vehicles for unmanned persons, including ward, local government chairmen of the party and council care-taker chairmen.

    He also alleged that funds were also disbursed to them all geared toward the election and spent in excess of N200 million allowed by the Electoral Act, 2010 as amended.

    The tribunal said the petitioner listed about 15 documents which he intended to rely upon but could not successfully tender two in evidence, including P1 and P2.

    These, according to the tribunal, were CTC of newspaper publications that have no “probative value”.

    “He did not call a single witness to corroborate or substantiate his allegations and did not tell the tribunal where the unlawful campaign took place nor deem it fit to call any election monitor to testify for him.

    “Allegations of spending money beyond permissible limit, massive sharing of money to voters and unlawful spending on Election Day was ‘grossly unsubstantiated and pitiably tenuous’.

    “With all issues considered, and in the light of all foregoing, we come to the irresistible and compelling conclusion that the petitioner has failed to prove by credible and satisfactory evidence that the election of the first respondent as governor of Anambra was marred by corrupt practices.

    “The sole issue for determination is resolved in the negative against the petitioner; the petition is dismissed in its entirety as it is bereft of any scintilla of merit.

    “We hereby affirm that the first respondent was duly elected on Nov. 18, 2017,” the tribunal ruled.

    The tribunal had earlier struck out the petition of African Peoples Party (APP) against the governor following the preliminary objection raised by the respondents for lack of merit.

    Obiano, candidate of APGA, won the election with a total of 234, 071 from the total of 488,771 votes cast.

     

  • INEC seeks electoral offences commission, tribunal before 2019 poll

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has called on the National Assembly and other stakeholders to expedite action on the bill to establish the National Electoral Offences Commission/Tribunal ahead of the 2019 general elections.

    This is just as the Commission said it recorded 1,080 cases of electoral offences arising from the 2015 general elections and subsequent bye-elections.

    He  stated that 124 of the cases were filed and 60 convictions secured in various courts across the country.

    INEC Chairman Prof Mahmood Yakubu broke the news yesterday in a memorandum he submitted to the Senate joint committee on INEC and the Judiciary.

    Yakubu expressed dismay that reports of the Electoral Reform Committee (the Uwais Report) 2008, and the Post-election Violence (Lemu Report) 2011 have been left to gather dusts on the shelves.

    According to the INEC chair, the two reports had recommended the establishment of the Electoral Offences Commission/Tribunal to address all forms of electoral violence and impunity that have continued to undermine the stability of the nation’s electoral democracy.

    Yakubu bemoaned the fact that though it has the powers to prosecute, INEC lacked the powers to effect the arrest of electoral offenders, a situation he said, has continued to hamper effective prosecution of offenders.

    He said: “While the Uwais Report was transmitted by the executive to the National Assembly in 2010, the White Paper on recommendations of the Lemu Report directed the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minster of Justice to take steps towards the establishment of the Electoral Offences Tribunal.

    “Nearly a decade later, there has been no legislative action on these aspects of the recommendations of the Uwais and Lemu reports, making the present effort by the Senate and the concurrent effort by the House of Representatives a welcome development.

    “The failure to systematically and consistently enforce sanctions has encouraged impunity and the violence that often characterised electoral contest in Nigeria, thereby subverting the will of the people and undermining the nation’s electoral democracy.

    “At present, INEC is saddled with the responsibility of prosecuting electoral offender. Section 150(1) and (2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) empowered INEC prosecute electoral offenders through its legal officers or any legal practitioner appointed by it without the powers to arrest and investigate thus depending on the police for this purpose.

    “Without the capacity to make arrest and investigate violations, the prosecutorial role is severely hampered. INEC cannot effectively focus on this role given its other variegated responsibilities under the Constitution  and the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended)”.

    Chairman of the Senate committee on INEC, Senator Suleiman Nazif noted that over the years, statistics showed that the various electoral offences and crimes orchestrated by politicians have cast shadows over the nation’s electoral process.

    “Subsequently, due to human dynamics, crimes and offences of election tend to evolve. Therefore, we must look beyond the usual offences and into new trends of wider social electoral offences and crimes that have evaded justice for too long’’Senator Nazif said.,

  • Lagos appeals tribunal gets 22 cases

    Lagos appeals tribunal gets 22 cases

    The Lagos State Local Government Election Appeals Tribunal has received 22 appeals from parties contesting results of the Election Petitions Tribunal.

    Its Chairperson, Justice Grace Onyeabo, spoke yesterday at the tribunal’s inaugural sitting.

    Other members are: Justices Oladunni Kasali, Adeniyi Onigbanjo, Owolabi Dabiri and Kudirat Jose.

    The tribunal, which was inaugurated on October 23, will hear and determine within 21 days appeals arising from the July 22 council election.

    Justice Onyeabo averred that any application for enlargement of time on appeals shall not be granted, particularly “if it is in such a manner as to extend the time for determination of the appeal beyond the 21 days prescribed”.

    She added: “…The tribunal solicits the cooperation from the bar to avoid time wasting applications.

    “The parties and learned counsel should be rest assured that this panel will be fair  and follow the rules strictly. We will have to modify our sitting because of time constraint.

    “We also appeal to all that there should be no hobnobbing with members and tribunal workers, to allow us concentrate and perform this duty to the society.”

  • Conduct tribunal chair may face fresh EFCC probe

    Conduct tribunal chair may face fresh EFCC probe

    Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Chairman Justice Danladi Umar may face a fresh probe by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over some allegations, The Nation learnt yesterday.

    The CCT acquitted Senate President Bukola Saraki of a false assets declaration charge on Wednesday.

    The allegations against Umar include  a N10million bribe said to have been collected by him by his Personal Assistant, Ali Gambo Abdullahi.

    The discovery of fresh clues on Umar’s conduct is said to have sparked the planned probe.

    But, a top CCT official said the EFCC had on February 23, 2015 and April 20, 2016 cleared Umar of the alleged N10million bribe.

    A source, who hinted of the planned probe, said Umar may soon be invited for questioning.

    The highly-placed source said: “The anti-graft agency is already probing some allegations against the CCT chairman, including the alleged collection of a N10million bribe and award of contracts. Some of these allegations were actually tabled before the Senate and the House of Representatives.

    “The initial plan was to conduct the investigation during the trial of the Senate President. But the EFCC decided to stay action  in order not to disrupt the judicial process.

    “With the trial over, we are going to interview Justice Umar on these allegations. The details include the payment of N1million in July 2011 from the coffers of the CCT to sponsor his wedding; alleged spending of N15.2million to purchase a Toyota Prado Jeep ‘without following due process; award of contracts for supply of office furniture and fittings in the sum of N11.3million.

    “The contracts were reportedly executed by a ‘supposedly engineering company and not a furniture or supply company.’

    “Other allegations are alleged payment of N4. 2million for the “purchase of welfare items” in a contract executed by a private individual and another N4.2 million for the procurement of external light bulbs”.

    On the allegation against the judge by an online medium, the source said: “We will look at all clues to ascertain whether they are true or not.”

    But the planned investigation generating heat at the tribunal because the EFCC cleared of the alleged N10million bribe.

    A source at the tribunal said: “We suspect foul play because the EFCC cleared Justice Umar in 2015 and 2016  of any wrongdoing. This latest probe may be the aftermath of the judgment of the tribunal which discharged and acquitted the Senate President.

    “I think the EFCC is after a proxy war. The judge is a fair-minded person who has defied pressure to do his job.

    “While the trial of Saraki lasted, he has persistently said he will discharge his duties without fear or favour because he will account to God one day. The EFCC should leave this judge alone. Even until the judgement was delivered, Saraki and his legal team were kept on the edge. This is to show you the level of his fairness.

    “The CCT chairman is not the accounting officer of the tribunal contrary to insinuations. He does not award contracts.  Both the Senate and the House of Representatives investigated the CCT chairman on all these allegations and nothing came out of the probe.”

    The EFCC, in a letter to the former Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Anyim Pius Anyim absolved Umar of bribery allegation.

    The letter signed by its ex-chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde said: “We refer to your letter ref. No. SGF.19./S.24/11/451 dated 23rd February 2015 on the above mentioned case reported by one Mr. Rasheed Taiwo (DCG rtd) of 6AB Milverton Road, Lagos against the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Justice Danladi Umar and his Personal Assistant, one Gambo Abdullahi.

    “The complainant who is facing charges at the Code of Conduct Tribunal alleged that Justice Umar made direct demand for the sum of N10 million to quash the charges sometimes in 2012. “He disclosed that he was compelled to pay the sum of N1.8 million after persistent inundation with phone calls from Justice Umar, who received the bribe through the Zenith Bank account of one Ali Gambo Abdullahi, his personal Assistant in December, 2012.

    “Investigation was extended to one Hon. Justice G.A Oguntade (Rtd) who confirmed that the complainant informed him in 2012 of the issues he had at the Tribunal and the demand being made by Justice Umar. He disclosed that Justice Umar denied the allegation when he called him.

    “There are indications that the Tribunal Chairman might have demanded and collected money from the complainant through his said Personal Assistant.

    “However, efforts made to recover the telephone handset used by Justice Umar proved abortive, as he claimed that he had lost the telephone in 2012. This has made it impossible to subject it to independent scientific analysis with a view to corroborating the allegation.

    “In the same vein, the complainant could also not make available his telephone set for analysis on the grounds that he had lost it. Justice Umar also admitted that he met privately with the complainant in his chamber at the Tribunal. This is a most unethical and highly suspicious conduct on his part.

    ”There is a prima facie evidence to however prosecute  the Personal  Assistant, Abdullahi, who could offer no coherent excuse for receiving N1.8million into his salary account from Taiwo, who is  an accused person standing trial at the tribunal.

    “The full money has been recovered from him in May 2014 and aptly registered as exhibit. The fact that he made two contradictory statements on the reason he was paid the money, is clearly an attempt to cover up on the  reason the money was paid to him. He has  accordingly been charged to court in charge no. CR/137/2015 pending  at the High Court of FCT, Abuja.

    “However the facts as they are now against Justice Umar raised a mere suspicion and will therefore not be sufficient to successfully prosecute him for the offence.

    “Above is submitted for the information of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, please.”

    Also, the Secretary to EFCC, Mr. Emamnuel Adegboyega Aremo, in another letter to the SGF on April 20, 2016 exonerated Justice Danladi of corrupt practices.

    The letter said: “We will like to reiterate the Commission’s position in regard to this matter as earlier communicated to you and state that the allegations leveled against Justice Umar were mere suspicions and consequently insufficient to successfully prosecute the offence.”

  • APC, Obaseki file cross-appeal against tribunal’s ruling

    Edo State Governor Godwin Obaseki and his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), have filed a four-ground of cross-appeal against part of the judgment of the tribunal, which upheld Obaseki’s election.

    The APC and Obaseki are the second and third respondents in the appeal filed by Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu and his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), at the Court of Appeal.

    Obaseki and the APC are challenging the ruling of Justice Ahmed Badamasi for refusing to strike out the “offensive” paragraphs and/or the petition based on the two applications.

    In its four grounds of cross-appeal, Obaseki and the APC averred that the tribunal erred in law when it held that “the essence of the application is to defeat the intendment of the petition through technical process, it is premature at this stage to consider striking out paragraphs 17 to 753 and we so hold”.

    Among the reliefs sought in the cross-appellants are: an order of the appellate court to allow the cross-appeal; an order granting their motion on notice, dated and filed on November 30, last year, by striking out paragraph 16(1) of the petition, which touches on corrupt practices and other paragraphs of the petition on which allegations of corrupt practices were pleaded, including paragraphs 17 to 753.

    They are contending that the tribunal breached the cross-appellants’ right to fair hearing when it failed to adequately consider the issues raised and submitted before it.

    The cross-appellants also said the tribunal erred in law when it held, at page 35 of the judgment, as follows: “A careful perusal of paragraphs four to 501 of the third respondent’s reply to the petition, one will see new issues raised by the third respondent, which are not contained in the petition.”

    They also submitted that the tribunal erred in law and breached the cross-appellants’ right to fair hearing when it held on page 36 of the judgment as follows: “There is no law prohibiting the petitioners from filing additional statement on oath of the petitioners in response to the third respondent’s reply to the petition.”

  • APC, Obaseki file Cross Appeal against Edo tribunal ruling

    APC, Obaseki file Cross Appeal against Edo tribunal ruling

    Edo State Governor, Mr. Godwin Obaseki and the All Progressives Congress (APC), have filed a four-ground of Cross Appeal against part of the judgment of the tribunal that upheld the result of the gubernatorial election in the state.

    The APC and Obaseki are the 2nd and 3rd Respondents in the appeal filed by Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) at the Court of Appeal.

    Obaseki and the APC are challenging the ruling of Justice Ahmed Badamasi refusing to strike out the offensive paragraphs and or the petition based on the two applications.

    In its four grounds of cross appeal, Governor Obaseki and the APC contended that the trial tribunal erred in law when it held that “the whole essence of the application is to defeat the intendment of the petition through technical process, it is premature at this stage to consider striking out paragraph 17 – 753 and we so hold ”

    Among the reliefs sought by the Cross Appellants are an order of the appellate court to allow the cross appeal, an order granting their motion on notice dated and filed on ,30th November 2016 by striking out paragraph 16(1) of the petition touching on corrupt practices and all other paragraphs of the petition; in which allegations of corrupt practices are pleaded including paragraphs 17 – 753.

    They are contending that the tribunal breached the Cross Appellants’ constitutional right to fair hearing when it failed to adequately consider all the issues raised and submitted before it.

    The Cross Appellants also said that the trial tribunal erred in law when it held at page 35 of the judgement as follows: “A careful perusal of paragraph 4 – 501 of the 3rd Respondent’s reply to the petition, one will see new issues raised by the 3rd respondent which are not contained in the petition”

    They also submitted that the trial tribunal erred in law and breached the Cross Appellants’ right to fair hearing when it held on page, 36 of the judgement as follows “There is no law prohibiting the petitioners from filing additional statement on oath of the Petitioners in response to the 3rd respondent’s reply to the petition”.