The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Tribunal

  • Why we rejected Edo tribunal’s ruling-PDP

    Why we rejected Edo tribunal’s ruling-PDP

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Edo State has explained why it rejected Friday’s ruling of the Election Petitions Tribunal which affirmed the election of Governor Godwin Obaseki.

    Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Ahmed Badamasi, had in a unanimous judgment thrown out the petition of the PDP and its governorship candidate, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu for failing to support their pleadings with evidence as well as abandoning some pleadings in their petition.

    State Chairman of the PDP, Chief Dan Orbih, who gave reasons why the party rejected the judgement said the tribunal threw away the results obtained from the inconclusive ballot recount.

    Chief Orbih said the tribunal expected the party and its candidate to call over 2,000 witnesses within the 14 days allotted to prove its case.

    Orbih noted that the tribunal through it pronouncement said different unit presiding officers could adopt different standards in the conduct of same election and that the tribunal was saying that there was no need for uniformity in the conduct of elections.

    He said, “Conduct of an election is not a free-for-all exercise where anyone is at liberty to apply his own discretion. What Justice Badamasi was simply saying was that whether the presiding officers followed the regulations or not did not matter.

    “For the first time ever, a judge redefined over-voting as a situation whereby the total number of votes cast exceeds the total number of registered voters. Is that not laughable? I think these are the salient issues that we will challenge.”

    Orbih also challenged former governor Adams Oshiomhole to explain what he meant when he (Oshiomhole) referred to the tribunal verdict as “Mama Akara judgement.”

    He stated that Oshiomhole’s comment suggested that Oshiomhole may have inadvertently exposed how his party purchased the verdict.

    His words, “I watched former Governor Adams Oshiomhole on national television describing Friday’s judgement as Mama Akara judgement. This is about the first time Oshiomhole will be describing things the way they are in his political life.”

    “We know what goes into the making of akara and we also know that the Mama Akara will not part with her akara for nothing. So, we are demanding from Oshiomhole to tell Edo people and indeed Nigerians what was handed the Mama Akara before she let go of her akara.”

  • Act on electoral offences tribunal, independent candidacy, Bourdex tasks Senate

    Act on electoral offences tribunal, independent candidacy, Bourdex tasks Senate

    All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Board of Trustees member, Dr. David Onuoha-Bourdex, has expressed surprise that the Senate did not go the whole hog to strengthen the Electoral Act by prescribing stiffer punishment for poll offenders.

    While commending the 8th Senate for the bold and timely review of the 2010 Electoral Act, he noted that apart from legislating fines for electoral officers that may engage in tampering and manipulation of votes, there is need for an electoral offences tribunal.

    Bourdex, who was the APGA Senatorial candidate for Abia North District in the 2015 National Assembly Election, disclosed that experience has shown that whenever such revolutionary legislations, as the inclusion of full electronic voting are made, unscrupulous politicians begin to explore loopholes.

    “Therefore because of imperfection of human insight, there is need to institute electoral offences tribunal to show seriousness over electoral malfeasance. It is the lack of appropriate mechanism to punish offenders that has helped to embolden enemies of real democracy to breach the law,” he stressed.

    Recalling the imperfections of the 2015 election, the telecom expert noted that the use of incidence forms proved a ready gateway for unpopular candidates to undermine popular vote, insisting that until there is institutional checks and enforcement mechanism, good laws will remain impotent in addressing flaws in Nigeria’s electoral system.

    The APGA BoT member urged the National Assembly to use the opportunity of constitutional reforms to ensure that all loopholes for toying with the civic decisions of the citizens were blocked.

    He suggested that school enrolment and number of taxpayers should be applied as necessary controls to check the number of registered voters, adding that the allegation of under-aged voting in certain polling units was not entirely frivolous.

    His words: “It beats every sane imagination that certain areas with high voting population do not return commensurate tax returns and school enrolment figures. This new thinking about our electoral system should incorporate school enrollment and internal revenue generation to shadow voting numbers.

    “Also as electoral officials are punished, efforts should be made to equally punish their collaborators, the parties and candidates. All in all, citizen vigilance remains the greatest check against electoral malfeasance. Therefore, the electoral body should increase voter enlightenment and education on what constitute electoral offences.”

    Bourdex renewed his call that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should be the respondent on election petitions, pointing out that the cost of losing election petitions should also ginger INEC to ensure the credibility of elections it conducts.

    To ensure full democratization of the electoral process, Onuoha-Bourdex implored the National Assembly to make room for independent candidacy, stressing that that was a sure way to limit the extortionist propensity of some party leaders, who use the platform for trading purposes.

    “With independent candidacy, communities can elect a preferred candidate even when the political parties do not consider him or her; it would also offer opportunity to responsible people who detest the dirty side of partisan politics, to participate in politics and serve the people,” he stated

  • Tribunal declines PDP’s, Ize-Iyamu’s bid to bring new evidence

    Tribunal declines PDP’s, Ize-Iyamu’s bid to bring new evidence

    The Edo State Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Benin, the state capital, yesterday ruled against a bid by Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu, to introduce fresh evidence, besides those deposed to by their principal witness (PW) 13, Alhaji Mohammed Shaibu.
    In his earlier deposition, Shaibu, a resident of Okugbe-Okpella in Etsako East Local Government, said his complaints stemmed from accreditation alone.
    But during cross-examination, he said: “I voted in Unit 9 and no voter was accredited via the voters’ register. I complained.”
    Asked if he would be surprised to see that his name was not on the voters’ register, Shaibu said: “My name is there. I agree that I must accredit before I vote, and anyone who is not registered in a particular polling unit cannot vote there.”
    When the witness was shown the voters’ register for Unit 9, where he claimed to have voted, he expressed shock that his name was not on the register.
    The only Mohammed on the list was Mohammed Awosetu.
    The petitioners’ lawyer Denwigwe (SAN) argued that Shaibu was a registered voter, adding that he voted.
    The lawyer asked the witness to tender his voter’s card.
    The defendants’ lawyer Tunji Oyeyipo opposed the attempt to make the witness tender his voter’s card as evidence of voting, after agreeing that his name was not onthe voters’ register.
    Oyeyipo prayed the court to reject the move since it was not pleaded in the witness’s deposition.
    Tribunal Chairman Justice A. T. Badamasi said it was trite law and an attempt to introduce fresh issues.
    He said: “He (Shaibu) could not point his name in the voters’ register. The petitioners could have raised the issues in their pleadings. It is our view that your plea is lacking in merit and it is hereby refused.”
    Other witnesses from Estako East who testified are: Etame Oshiomah, Alhaji Mohammed Shaibu, Yusuf Seidu Abu and Ekpomiri Henry.
    They said there was no accreditation in some polling units, adding that there was over-voting at other polling units.
    The three-man panel, headed by Justice Ahmed Badamasi, was on break at the time of filing filing this report.

  • Tribunal adjourns Saraki’s trial to Jan. 17

    Tribunal adjourns Saraki’s trial to Jan. 17

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal has adjourned the trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki to Jan. 17, to enable the prosecution to present more witnesses.

    Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Danladi Umar, adjourned the matter following request for more time by the prosecution counsel, Mr Rotimi Jacobs.

    Umar said the tribunal was doing all it can to work by the provisions of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), on the matter.

    “We are bound by the ACJA; we are trying to be lenient with all the parties. This matter is hereby adjourned to Jan. 17 for continuation of hearing,

    Jacobs had said some of the prosecution witnesses were in Lagos and that time was needed to enable him to produce them.

    Defence counsel led by Kanu Agabi (SAN), had prayed the court to grant leave for possible re-examination of a witness, Michael Wetkass.

    Agabi said there were perceived ambiguities in some of the evidences given by the witness during his examination and cross-examination.

    Mr Paul Usoro, a defence counsel informed the court that the essence of the re-examination was to clarify some of the ambiguities before the tribunal.

    “One of the charges says 3.4 million dollars was transferred but your evidence in chief says otherwise’’, Usoro said.

    Wetkass had told the tribunal that he did not investigate Saraki personally and that his business record was also not investigated by him.

    Wetkass also told the tribunal that he was part of the investigative team and that the total amount transferred by Saraki to his foreign account through America Expresss Bank was 3.5 million dollars.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that there was serious argument on the exact period Saraki’s property at No. 15, Madona Street, Ikoyi, Lagos was allocated to him. (NAN)

  • Edo poll: Tribunal dismisses petition against Obaseki

    Edo poll: Tribunal dismisses petition against Obaseki

    The Election Petition Tribunal has dismissed the petition filed by the the Young Democratic Party (YDP) against the Edo State Governor Godwin Obaseki of the All Progressives Congress (APC). The Tribunal described it as an “abandoned petition”.
    The YDP candidate, Nurudeen Inwanfero, had asked the tribunal to cancel the September 28 election, because the party’s logo was not included in the ballot papers used for the election.
    The Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Ahmed Badamasi, in his ruling yesterday said the petitioners failed to abide by paragraph 18 of the First Scheduled of the Electoral Act.
    Justice Badamasi delivered ruling on the oral application by Counsel to the petitioners, Ugo Nwofor, asking for adjournment to enable him put his ‘house in order’.
    Nwofor requested for the adjournment after the tribunal threw away petitioner number 3 filed by YDP to replace petition number one.
    Counsel to Obaseki Wole Olanipekun kicked against the requested adjournment, based on the fact that the petitioners failed to apply for pre-hearing notice.
    Justice Badamasi said the three-man panel has checked the records and did not find w here the petitioners or respondents applied for pre-hearing notices.
    The Judge held that paragraph 18 of the First Schedule of the Electoral Act empowers the tribunal to dismiss a petition as abandoned where it failed to abide by contents of the paragraph.
    The petition was therefore struck out.
    Speaking to newsmen after the ruling, Nurudeen said the party would appeal the ruling. He said petition number three that was earlier struck out was what the party relied on to secure victory.

  • Obaseki, APC urge tribunal to throw out YDP’s petition

    Obaseki, APC urge tribunal to throw out YDP’s petition

    Edo State Governor Godwin Obaseki and All Progressives Congress (APC) have urged the state’s Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Benin, the state capital, to throw out the petition filed by the Young Democratic Party (YDP) and its governorship candidate, Nurudeen Inwanfero, for lack of merit.

    Inwanfero is praying the tribunal to cancel the September 28 governorship election on the grounds that YDP’s logo was not on the ballot papers used for the election.

    At the resumed pre-hearing session, lead counsel to APC, Lateef Fagbemi, urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition and “give it a decent burial” because there was no reasonable cause of action.

    The lawyer averred that the petitioners filed two petitions at the tribunal as well as a notice of discontinuance on one of the petitions without complying with the Electoral Act.

    He said the issues were pre-election matters, which were not within the purview of the tribunal to decide – whether Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was right or wrong.

    Fagbemi argued that the petitioner was wrong to use the words “lawfully excluded and corrupt practices” in the petition when he did not participate in the election.

    He said: “Having regard to the electoral laws, has the petition complied with the Electoral Act? All decisions referred to are not relevant and do not apply to election matters. The law has prescribed what is to be done. Withdrawal is not automatic.

    “This tribunal is not to deal with pre-election matters. Whether INEC is wrong or right not to recognise the petitioner’s logo is not within the purview of the tribunal. I urged your lordship to give the petition a decent burial. It is dead on arrival.”

    INEC’s lead counsel Onyebuchi Ikpeazu said there was no reason to oppose Fagbemi’s application because he found no justification for the petition.

    Obaseki’s lead counsel Wole Olanipekun said it would be hypocritical to oppose the application.

    YDP’s lawyer Ugo Nwofor opposed the application, describing it as an abuse of court process.

    Nwofor noted that the arguments in the application were already dealing with the substantive matter.

    Chairman of the three-man panel, Justice Ahmed Badamasi, adjourned till December 8 for ruling on the application.

  • Declare me winner, Ize-Iyamu tells tribunal

    Declare me winner, Ize-Iyamu tells tribunal

    The People’s Democratic Party and its governorship candidate in the September 28 governorship polls in Edo State, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu, has filed a petition against the outcome of the election.

     

    In the petition, Pastor Ize-Iyamu is asking the tribunal to declare him winner of the election.

     

    Candidate of the All Progressive Congress, Mr. Godwin Obaseki, was declared winner of the election after polling 319,483 votes against 253,173 votes garnered by Pastor Ize-Iyamu.

     

    Pastor Ize-Iyamu beat the deadline by filing the petition at about 4:45pm even though party supporters and reporters had waited at the tribunal since 12noon.

     

    He was accompanied by the state party leaders and supporters. 

     

    State Chairman of the party, Chief Dan Orbih, said they filed the petition within the stipulated time as defined by the Electoral Laws.

     

    Chief Orbih said they presented what he termed ‘a very good case’ before the tribunal.

     

    Pastor Ize-Iyamu said they are asking the tribunal to declare him winner of the election.

     

    His words, “We just filed and in the next few days, you will begin to get brief about what is at stake. We are asking the court to declare us as the rightful winner of the election. 

     

    “Edo people know who won the election. We are law abiding despite the injustice. I thank Edo people for their patience despite their anger against the results announced by INEC. 

     

    “Throughout the campaigns, our people kept asking us if we were ready to defend the votes they are going to give to us. We assured them and they came out to vote for us. Democracy will not thrive if you allow people to allocate votes. Our case is a strong one and by the time sitting will start, Edo people will be amazed at the impunity to win at all cost.”

  • Again, election offences tribunal

    Again, election offences tribunal

    •This time, we must get it right

    Once again, a case has been made for the establishment of an electoral offences tribunal in the country. The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, who renewed the call for such a tribunal said this was due to the Federal Government’s concern over the spate of electoral malpractices.

    Malami spoke last week Tuesday in Abuja, while inaugurating the Senator Ken Nnamani-led committee on constitution and electoral reform. “The issues of internal democracy structures and the need to prevent the use of illicit funds in the electoral processes as well as the establishment of an electoral offences tribunal are pertinent, if we must evolve globally acceptable electoral system”, the minister said.

    We agree with the minister that our politicians have not learnt any lesson on proper conduct before, during and after electoral contests, and this is largely because violators of the electoral process are hardly arrested not to talk of prosecuted. We have instances where electoral officers, including innocent youth corps members were killed or kidnapped by political thugs during elections. When the killers are not identified or prosecuted, those killed died in vain. Even though convicting the criminals would not necessarily bring back the dead, it at least sends the signal to others who might be criminally minded that they have the law to contend with if they toe the same path.

    Of course, we can argue that the establishment of such tribunal is a duplication of the role of our regular courts, the point is, the courts already have their hands full as they cannot even cope with the many civil and criminal cases pending before them. The result is that justice has been travelling at a snail’s speed in the country. And, as the saying goes, “justice delayed is justice denied”.

    It is in realisation of this weakness of our regular courts that electoral petition tribunals were set up to quickly dispose of election petitions. So, if we have election petition tribunals addressing  matters arising from electoral contests, what stops us from having electoral offences tribunal to also try cases of electoral malpractices?

    This is something the country had been considering in the past few years. The Late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua himself admitted that the election that produced his presidency was flawed and set up the Muhammadu Uwais-led electoral reform committee, which recommended, among other things, the establishment of an Electoral Offences Tribunal. Unfortunately, ill-health, which ultimately led to his death, prevented him from seeing such through. Dr Goodluck Jonathan who succeeded him similarly acknowledged the need for an election offences tribunal while receiving the report of the National Stakeholders Forum on Electoral Reform presented by the same Nnamani, in Abuja, in 2014.

    He said: “We need this body (electoral offences tribunal) so that people who commit electoral offences will not get away with them. After elections, the matter goes to the tribunal. The only person who loses is the person who contested that election. Any other person who committed all kinds of atrocities gets away with it as nobody punishes him/her. That is why we continue to have that kind of impunity”. Again, he too could not set up such tribunal until he was voted out of office last year.

    We call on the Buhari administration not to pay lip service to the setting up of this important tribunal. The beauty of democracy is for votes to count. True, election results had been upturned by some tribunals in the past, thus redressing some injustices at the polls, the best place to slug out political contests is through the ballot box.

    The Nnamani committee has its job cut out for it because there are existing reports it can fall back on to facilitate its assignment. We hope the government will also muster the will to implement its recommendations this time around.

  • Tribunal upholds Dickson’s election as Bayelsa governor

    Tribunal upholds Dickson’s election as Bayelsa governor

    The Bayelsa State Governorship Electoral Petitions Tribunal has upheld the election of Seriake Disckson of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    The tribunal, in a judgment last night in Abuja, dismissed a petition filed by the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate Timipre Sylva on the grounds that it was without merit.

    A three-man panel of the tribunal, led by Justice Kazeem Alogba, in dismissing the petition, held that Sylva and his party failed to prove their case with credible evidence.

    The tribunal held that the petitioners failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the criminal allegations of electoral offences, which they said affected the outcome of the election.

    It said the petition was not supported by sufficient proof and required standard.

    The tribunal said: “The petitioners failed to prove that the second respondent (Dickson) did not score the highest lawful votes.

    “Therefore the return of the second respondent by the Independent National Electoral Commission on January 10, 2016 was valid.”

    Sylva and his party, on January 30, filed the petition challenging the decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to declare Dickson as the winner of the governorship election held on December 5, 2015 with the supplementary one held on January 9, 2016.

    The election in Southern Ijaw Local Government and some other parts was initially rescheduled to take place on December 6, 2015, but was cancelled, following widespread violence.

    The petitioner alleged that the election was marred by malpractices, intimidation of voters, hijacking of electoral materials, non-voting and non-collation of results in substantial parts of Sagbama, Yenogoa, Nembe, Ogbia,and Ekeremor local governments.

    Sylva contended that the INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner lacked the power to unilaterally cancel the supplementary election scheduled for Southern Ijaw Local Government for December 6, 2015, and rescheduled it to January 9, 2016.

    In its judgment, the tribunal held that INEC was right and had the power to have cancelled the supplementary election said to have held on December 6, 2015.

    The tribunal held that contrary to the petitioners’ contention, the decision to cancel the December 6, 2015, poll was not unilaterally taken by the REC, but was taken by INEC and “merely announced by the REC”.

    It held that there was evidence that the earlier supplementary election scheduled to hold on December 6, 2015, was marred by widespread violence, malpractices and irregularities.

    The tribunal said: “We have come to the conclusion that the election scheduled for December 6, 2015, was inconclusive.

    “Therefore, the rescheduling of the election in Southern Ijaw Local Government to January 9, 2016 was proper and valid.”

    The tribunal queried Sylva and his party for mobilising their supporters to participate in the January 9, 2016, election when they knew there was no basis for the election to hold.

    It held that the the video evidence tendered by the petition, which showed the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) announcing the cancellation of the Southern Ijaw Local Government’s supplementary election of December 6, 2016, was against the interest of the petitioners as the clip showed the REC as giving the widespread violence and malpractices in the area as the reasons for the cancellation.

    The tribunal said: “We have come to the conclusion that the supplementary election on January 9, 2016, was validly and properly conducted by INEC, and only for the sake of emphasis, the contention of the petitioners that the supplementary election did not hold on January 9, has become unmeritorious.”

    Justice Alogba, who read the lead judgment, said the evidence led by the petitioners was scanty. He noted that some of the allegations raised by the petitioners were without particulars.

    The judge said a petitioner, who alleged non-voting or electoral malpractices, must call at least one voter from each of the affected polling units to prove the alleged irregularities or that no voting took place in their polling unit.

    He said the petitioners failed “woefully” to prove the alleged malpractices and the various alleged electoral offences beyond reasonable doubt and how they affected the outcome of the election.

    Justice Alogba said: “To succeed in discharging the onus of proof, the petitioner must lead credible evidence. In the instant case, since the allegations are criminal in nature the standard of proof is proof beyond reasonable doubt”.

    Before deciding the main petition, the tribunal earlier struck out some paragraphs in the petition, containing criminal allegations against individuals that were not joined as parties in the petition.

    Justice Alogba held that majority of the documents tendered by the petitioners were inadmissible, and some ammounted to “admission against interest”.

    He said: “We are not convinced by the evidence of the petitioner, we prefer the evidence of the respondents that the election held in Sagbama Local Government.”

     

  • Mourinho to be called in Carneiro tribunal

    Jose Mourinho will be cross-examined as part of former Chelsea doctor Eva Carneiro’s employment tribunal.

    Carneiro has claimed constructive dismissal against Chelsea, having left the club in September following a row with Mourinho on the opening day of last season.

    The doctor and physiotherapist Jon Fearn were withdrawn from first-team action after entering the field to treat Eden Hazard late in the 1-1 draw with Swansea City – infuriating then-Chelsea manager Mourinho as his team was reduced to nine players as a result.

    Mourinho labelled Carneiro and Fearn “naive and impulsive” and the former did not appear on the bench in subsequent games before leaving the club.

    The Portuguese, who was sacked by Chelsea in December following the club’s dismal start to the season, was cleared of using discriminatory language towards Carneiro by the Football Association but still faces a personal legal claim for alleged victimisation and discrimination lodged by the medic.

    Carneiro’s case began at the London South Employment Tribunal on Monday, with QC Mary O’Rourke confirming that Manchester United manager Mourinho would be cross-examined – as well as Chelsea officials Bruce Buck and Marina Granovskaia.

    A Portuguese insult allegedly used by Mourinho could be central to the case. A short piece of a statement from Mourinho given in court defended his language, with both prosecution and defence poised to call expert witnesses in an attempt to determine exactly what was said.

    Mourinho’s appearance will be hotly anticipated, though the case threatens to overshadow his start to life as United boss, having replaced Louis van Gaal in the Old Trafford hot seat last month.