The National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal in Lokoja, Kogi State, yesterday dismissed the petition by Senator Smart Adeyemi of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging Senator Dino Melaye’s victory in Kogi West.
Smart headed for the tribunal to challenge Melaye’s election, alleging that the poll was fraught with irregularities and that Senator Melaye of the All Progressives Congress (APC) did not participate in his party’s primaries.
The tribunal Chairman, Justice Akon Ikpeme, faulted the five grounds on which the petitioner (Smart Adeyemi) hinged his case and dismissed the petition for lacking in merit.
Legal brickbats can be a drab and boring exercise, especially to the uninitiated. The call of witnesses to the dock, the questions, mannerism, gesticulations, the objections and the counters can really wrack the nerves. But, watching the Learned Men throw banters at each other at the beginning and end of court sessions and charging at each other during proceedings presents quite a paradox. Call it a profession’s shenanigans if you like. It’s just the ways of law and Lawyers.
This scenario was evident in the contentious Akwa Ibom governorship election legal tussle holding in Hall 8 of the Abuja High Court. It was exhirating watching Lawyers in the legal divide trying to ensnare each other to score legal points in a case which ordinarily should have been a very straight case of electoral fraud perpetrating against a people who have the constitutional right to choose who should governed them.
But, the most exciting part of the court drama, is usually when parties to a dispute are asked to adopt their written addresses to capture the high points in their attempt to sway the jury to see the law from their point of view. The drama, gesticulations, the shouting match, the inference to the position of law, quotations from authorities and decided cases to buoy up positions, and of course the resort to frivolous applications, to delay or derail the strings and order of proceeding, added to firm up such excitement
All these scenes played out October 8, 2015, when the parties in the Akwa Ibom Governorship Election Petition, were scheduled to adopt their written addresses, and consequently got a reserved date for judgment. First, to fire the strings of application was the Counsel to the Second Respondent, PDP, Mr Tayo Oyetibo who had failed to file their reply on point of law within the time prescribed by law and consequently sought extension of time. He capitalized on an innocuous typographical error on the date on the signature page of the Petitioners Address, which was suppose to be Sept. 30 but typed Oct. 30.2015.
It should be noted that it was on the signature page but not on the front page, to object to its adoption. This objection met the dexterity of Counsel to the Petitioner (Umana/APC), Wole Olanipekun(SAN), who after intense argument, backed by citations of law and decided cases got the Tribunal Chairman, Justice Sadiq Umar, to retort and warn “ Do not drag my court back.” He subsequently dismissed the objection.
• Umana
After the initial attempt to “drag the tribunal back”, the Final Addresses on the point of law commenced. Counsel to Umana/APC, Mr Wole Olanipekun (SAN) fired the first salvo by urging the Tribunal to grant all the reliefs he sought on about 11 grounds. Among the areas, he stated he had proven his case were in the irregularities. Seeing election as a process, he said the components and ingredients of elections, viz, accreditation, voting and collation were all proven to be irregular in the April 11, governorship elections in Akwa Ibom State. He said that the mistake the Respondents made was to chose to see the Petitioner’s case merely on Exhibit 317 which is the evidence from the card reader, instead of looking at the whole gamut of evidence from a total of360 exhibits, 52 witnesses, making a grand total of 412 materials (talisman), to prove their case.
He equally, drew the Tribunals attention to pages 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 14 of the address which proved the issue of accreditation. In pages 17 and 18, the issue of collation were proven while pages 19 – 24 in the address graphically addressed the issue of return forms. He said the issue of regularity which the respondents made a big issue out of, can only arise if there was regularity in the election, but not in the case where the election was marred by widespread irregularities.
He said this was a case in which even the Governorship candidate in the election was not even allowed to vote! And, equally reminded the jury that the petition was able to bring two governorship candidates of other political parties (Accord and DPP) to come and testify to the Tribunal, while the Respondents couldn’t bring any. It was in the opinion of the Counsel that it bespeak of serious infraction in the election if the petitioner could call collation agents to come to the Tribunal to testify and the respondents couldn’t bring any.
Olanipekun referred the tribunal to pages 8, 9, 10 and 11 of his address to counter the point the respondents made about the issue of card reader where they said was against the Electoral Act and asked rhetorically whether the use of card reader did not prove the issue of accreditation. He seriously sought the attention of the tribunal to the fact that though the respondents brought the Incidence forms to the tribunal, they didn’t tender them. The simple reason being that those forms, meant to authenticate accreditation for voting, were not signed! It was a clear case of allocating figure and seeking to fill the forms, but the ad-hoc electoral officers couldn’t be traced to sign them.
Counsel to the petitioners reminded the tribunal that while the petitioners brought ballot papers before the court, the respondents ended up saying the ballots were mixed up, a clear bridge of the electoral guidelines which require that ballots should be clearly filed away and stored after elections, in order which the elections were held. But, in this case, the ballots were jumbled up, showing criminal intent.
Concluding the address, the lawyer backed his erudition by quoting from a plethora of laws, rules, legislation and decided cases, and urged the Lordship to grant all the reliefs sought by the petitioners, adding a time- tested quote “No election known to law, no election known to mankind, no election known to civilization was conducted in Akwa Ibom State” ( on April 11, 2015). He added “The respondents ran away from discussing the issue of the mode of accreditation, they constantly attacked card readers but they ran away from discussing how the accreditation was done. They brought incidence forms but refused to tender them.”
•Emmanuel
Conversely, and expectedly, the respondents which include Udom Emmanuel, PDP, INEC and Resident Electoral Commissioner, Austin Okojie, represented by Paul Usoro (SAN), Tayo Oyetibo and Onyechi Ikpeazu, tried to put up spirited effort to douse the brilliant erudition of the petitioners. They all hinged their defence on the regularity of the process, which they posit was in favour of INEC as far the election results were concerned. This was meant to counter the petitioners’ claims that the elections were marred by irregularities.
Paul Usoro was particular in stating that the election result was a pyramid and form EC 8A collated from polling units was not used to prove irregularities. He equally made allusion to the fact that, with 2980 polling units, only 52 witnesses were called by the petitioner. But the question in this case has been, if the petitioners presented 52 witnesses and also tendered 360 exhibits, making a total of 412 talisman, how many did the election ‘winner’ presents? 19 witnesses for Udom Emmanuel out of over 400 listed and a further application for 9000! Laughable.
The case of PDP and INEC presented a pathetic case. While Tayo Oyetibo harped on the assertion that the petitioner said that they were no election but it presented card readers, and that the petitioners said only 19 wards had elections, INEC represented by Mr Ikpeazu equally attacked the card reader(exhibit 317), and why it was not a veritable material in the case. The learned SAN also saw something wrong with the employment of forensic experts, saying they were not in Akwa Ibom state during the election and were merely relying on documentary hearsay. He also faulted the petitioners’ claim that they were voting in some cases but materials were snatched on the way to collation centres.
The points to note here is that harping on the card reader was INEC method to curb rigging, and was officially designated as a tool during the elections. In any case, the petitioner brought exhibit 317 (card reader) to disprove the claim of over a million accredited voters as claimed by INEC. Secondly, if other states have used card readers, adhering strictly to the directive from INEC National Secretary, Mrs Augusta C. Ogakwu that the use of the equipment was compulsory, why didn’t the Akwa Ibom INEC obey the rule?
Most important, why didn’t they tender the Incidence which was supposed to be the alternative to the card reader? And still, which method did the state electoral body was used to authenticate the voters if the card reader and the Incidence form are not the basis for verifying voters? Again, the claim that the forensic expert were not in the state when the fraud of election occurred, is to say the least, infantile. Must forensic auditors, pathologists, etc, be around when financial fraud or murder is committed? For God’s sake these are researches that can capture or authenticate fraud whether you are around or not when the crimes were committed.
A million questions can be asked but that would be left for the Tribunal, while they ponder over the volume of evidences before them. But one thing is sure, it is quite soothing to know that elections in our state and country is going through serious scrutiny. The era when touts, miscreants and societal misfits take over the political space, using intimidation, will grind to an end. And this will largely depend on a court verdict that will be decided on the points of law and not on technicalities. Mundane issues such as using initials for witnesses, signing signatures in inappropriate places or putting dates in wrong places cannot vitiate the fact that law abiding citizens were eager to go out and exercise their constitutional franchise but were stopped by people who insisted on foisting themselves on them and continue to exhibit mediocrity, impudence, and arrogance in the political space of our people. It is one election that will bring sanity to our electoral system and encourage people who something to contribute to society to step forward. And, most important, it will make politics persuasive, passionate and would have complemented the change mantra which is coursing through the land like a tide.
Ankak, a journalist and public affairs analyst, lives in Lagos
The National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Lokoja, Kogi State Monday dismissed the petition filed by Senator Smart Adeyemi of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging the victory
of Senator Dino Melaye representing the Kogi West Senatorial district.
Smart headed for the tribunal to challenge Melaye’s election, alleging that the election was fraught with irregularities and that Melaye of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate did not participate
in his party’s primary.
The tribunal chairman, Justice Akon Ikpeme in her ruling faulted all the five grounds upon which the petitioner (Smart Adeyemi) hinged his case and subsequently dismissed the petition for lacking in merit.
She held that the petitioner, Adeyemi was unable to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt.
On allegation that Melaye did not score the majority lawful votes in the election, the tribunal held that the petitioner could not prove his case beyond reasonable doubt, saying that whoever alleges fraud in
an election must prove his case beyond reasonable doubt.
It also dismissed the ground that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) did not substantially comply with the Electoral Act, saying the petitioner could equally not prove his allegation beyond reasonable doubt.
On whether Melaye was properly fielded as the candidate of the APC for the election, the tribunal held that documentary evidences presented to it by both the party (APC) and INEC corroborated the fact that
Melaye was the winner of the APC primaries held on December 8, 2014 at Kabba, Kogi State.
Security agencies in Abia State have tightened security ahead of the tribunal’s sitting today.
It was gathered that political parties had been anxious due to the uncertainty of who the judgment will favour.
A source said there were reports that some supporters of some parties have threatened mayhem if the ruling does not favor them.
The source added that plain-clothed officers have been dispatched to volatile areas.
Commissioner of Police Joshiak Habila, in a telephone chat said the police were working with sister agencies to stall a possible breakdown of law and order, adding that any attempt by any group of persons or political parties to cause a breach of the law would be met with stiff resistance.
“This time we are very much aware of the fact that either way it goes there are likely to be people who want to get laws into their hands and so we have drawn an operation order and we have sensitised our men.
“We earmarked and drew a posting that will take care of the vulnerable points; areas where we have government facilities and other likely places that aggrieved people might try to invade when the ruling goes either way. We are also collaborating with other security agencies in doing what we called the convoy patrol, stop and search.
“Let Abians and politicians know that politicking is disagreement to agree. It is about Abia and nobody else and whatever the judgment is, people should take it in good fate. There are other proper channels of registering grievances and appeal,” Habila said.
A self-acclaimed Islamic scholar, Malam Sayyadi Hassan Muhammad, was among 10 suspects paraded by the Kano State Police Command yesterday for various offences ranging from armed robbery, car snatching and theft to drug peddling.
The Commissioner of Police in the state, Muhammad Musa Katsina, while parading the suspects before newsmen at the command’s headquarters in Bompai, said that Mohammad, of Unguwa-Uku Quarters, had induced a domestic servant, Mukaila Ibrahim, 37, of Nasarawa GRA to steal a sum of $100,000, which is the equivalent of N22 million, from his employer.
The Islamic scholar told the domestic servant that if he was ready to part with some of the stolen money, he would pray against its exposure. At the end of the deal, the lslamic scholar gave the sum of N6 million to Mukaila and kept the balance of N16 million.
Katsina said that the scholar used part of his loot to buy a Honda Civic car valued at N850,000, a tricycle valued at
N430,000 and a Mercedes Benz C-Class car valued at N1.6 million.
He also rented a shop at Kantin Kwari market at the cost of N1.5 million, acquired posh cars and rented a shop valued at N5.2 million, with textile materials valued at N1.6 million and a cash sum of N432, 100. Recovered as well were white clothes and papers with Arabic inscriptions for rituals.
With his share, Mukaila bought a plot of land, which he developed at
Hotoro area to the value of N2, 165,200, a golf vehicle valued at
N550,000, a Zongshen motorcycle valued at N135,000, a fridge, a set of television, a decoder and a gas-cooker.
Another suspect, Habib, was given the sum of N90,000.
The police boss said that three car-snatching syndicates were also apprehended by the Special Anti-Robbery squad (SRS), which recovered an English-made Barreta pistol (No. 14-13337), one live ammunition and an expanded shell in their possession.
Katsina said that one suspect identified as Kelechi Sunday with two others from Mbano Local Government Area of Imo state attacked the home of a retired senior police officer and a former Military Administrator in a robbery attempt.
He added that on receiving a distress call, the vigilant policemen swiftly responded. On sighting the police, the armed robbers opened fire and a policeman was injured.
Katsina added that during the gun duel, Kelechi Sunday was shot on the leg and his accomplice who disguised as a palm oil trader escaped.
During interrogation, Kelechi confessed that they were in Kano to rob in order to boost their business and raise money for imminent Christmas and New Year festivities.
An on-the-spot search of the suspect yielded a knife, two live cartridges and one empty shell.
The commissioner, however, warned criminals and people with criminal intention that the command is always on its toes and would not allow the state to be a hideout.
The National Assembly Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Ikeja on Friday upheld the victory of the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, Mr. Femi Gbajabiamila.
The tribunal held that Gbajabiamila of the All Progressives Congress (APC) validly won the March 28 election for Surulere Federal Constituency I in Lagos State.
The three-man tribunal led by Justice C.U. Anwuka resolved all issues raised in favour of the respondent.
The tribunal consequently dismissed the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party candidate, Mr Tony Ashikodi, for failing to prove the allegations of electoral fraud.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Ashikodi had petitioned the tribunal challenging the outcome of the election.
Ashikodi had alleged that he observed some irregularities during the election which contravened the provisions of the Independent National Electoral Commission’s approved guidelines.
He urged the court to void the election and order a fresh election to be conducted by INEC.
The petitioner had alleged that “the final figures in Form EC 8 C (i) were cancelled and altered with a view to declaring Gbajabiamila the winner of the election.”
He claimed that the 14,351 received by the APC candidate was “whimsically changed’’ to 21,715 while 16,079 earlier recorded for petitioner was changed to 14,550.
However in the judgment, the tribunal said Ashikodi failed to substantiate his allegations that ballot boxes were snatched and result sheets falsified by INEC.
The judges noted that the petitioner failed to call a single witness to substantiate his claims.
They said Ashikodi, in his evidence-in-chief, admitted that he was not present at the collation centre and did not tender any document to back his allegations of multiple irregularities.
The tribunal also faulted the claim of the petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Kalu Onuah, that the election did not comply with Section 139 of the Electoral Act and therefore dismissed the petition.
The National Assembly Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Minna, Niger State, on Thursday upheld the election of Alhaji Lado Abdullahi, the member representing Suleja, Gurara, Tafa Federal Constituency.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Lado’s election was challenged by Mr. Mukhtar Ahmed of the PDP on the grounds that the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate was not qualified to contest the March 28 elections.
The petitioner alleged that Lado did not possess the minimum educational qualification as stipulated by law and had forged the certificates he presented to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to contest the election.
Delivering judgement after reviewing evidences adduced by parties in the matter, Chairman of the Tribunal, Justice Olatunde Oshodi, dismissed the petition for lack of merit.
He ordered the petitioner to pay the sum of N100, 000 to each of the respondents.
Reacting to the verdict, counsel to the petitioner, Mohammed Mohammed, told newsmen that they would study the judgment and decide on the next line of action.
“Well, we are going to review the judgment of the tribunal and advise our client accordingly,” he said.
A former officer of the Department of State Security Service (DSS), Emmanuel Philips was yesterday rattled at the Rivers State Governorship Election Tribunal while responding to questions from Chief Akin Olujinmi, the lead counsel to the APC governorship candidate, Dr. Dakuku Peterside.
Phillips, second respondent witness, told the tribunal that he provided security in 10 local government areas during the April 11poll.
He listed the local governments as Port Harcourt, Obio/Akpo, Emohua, Akuku-Toru, Asari-Toru, Abua/Odua, Ahoada East, Ahoada West, Ogu-Bolo and Eleme Local Government Areas.
He said he supervised officers and men who patrolled nearly a dozen local governments in Rivers State in less than 24 hours.
When asked how he achieved the feat in the riverine state, he said he “covered all these far-flung villages and towns with just a Hilux vehicle, and not even a helicopter in only one day.”
But APC faulted Phillips claim that he supervised the said election for DSS.
The party also told the tribunal that it was impossible to cover the 10 local governments with a Hilux Van in 24 hours.
The submission of APC rattled Phillips who could not explain how he supervised the conduct of election in 10 local governments.
The party also cross- examined Phillips with documents of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) which clearly revealed the damage violence and multiple voting did in the areas he allegedly covered.
APC through its counsel said: “Mr. Phillips didn’t tell the court was that he was not in charge of the elections on April 11.
“Abok Nyam was the Director of State Security Service on election day. He is senior in rank to Mr. Philips and was the person who deployed men on Election Day.
“Mr. Philips reported to Mr. Nyam on Election Day and did not step out alone. The only occasion that Mr. Philips went out, it was in company of Mr. Nyam and they both toured around Port Harcourt city.”
Overwhelmed by APC evidence, Phillips recanted his submissions to the tribunal.
It was a day of drama when another witness, Samson Joseph from Abua/Odual Local Government Area of the state, claimed to have voted at Unit 2, Ward 7 but he refused to identify his passport.
He said he cannot identify the document because he was not the author.
But INEC’s report showed no ballot paper was issued throughout his ward.
INEC also said 508 people allegedly voted when the voters register had only 501.
On his part, a witness, Jackmay Emmanuel told of how voting took place and results announced.
He could not recall the figures he heard when results were announced.
Asked to identify his photograph in Exhibit 226/5, he declined and insisted that he could not read because it was black and white.
The Rivers State Governorship Election Tribunal is on its last stretch. After no less than three months of sitting, it is getting to the stage where witnesses are rounding off their evidence for Governor Nyesom Wike. The All Progressives Congress (APC), its candidate, Dr. Dakuku Peterside, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) have already taken their turns to present witnesses before the tribunal. Today will mark the second day that the witnesses of Governor Nyesom Wike will mount the box to give their evidence.
As expected, Peterside and APC brought witnesses to show that the election was a sham. PDP, INEC and Wike did the opposite. Wike’s witnesses started giving evidence on Wednesday. He has six days to call witnesses. By the end of today, he would have had two days, which means he still has Saturday, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday to wrap up with his witnesses—except the tribunal decides otherwise.
The first day for the PDP candidate was interesting and full of drama. All the defence witnesses refused to read documents, feigning poor vision. The witnesses, drawn mainly from Khana, Tai and Andoni local government areas, complained of vision impairment. Not a few see this as deliberate tactic to frustrate Peterside’s petition.
The witnesses include Monday Burabari Nkpoba, Elder Gbrone Gibson and Amos Apa, Barisua Peter, Chief Adagbo Samson, Godwin Gbarapi and Agahigiwune Isaiah. Their excuse created free entertainment for those in the court.
Apah, a retired civil servant from Tai Local Government Area, said he is 67 years, blaming his age for his inability to read the document. He was shown was shown Exhibit A300/5 which showed that no party agent signed the results. Samson, a civil servant from Khana, said he could not read because he forgot his reading glasses.
Under cross-examination, Peter also introduced a drama when he said he actually started voting at 15. Now 31, he said he started voting in 1999. The declaration of the trader, who claimed to have voted at Ward One, Unit One, Bori, Khana Local Government Area of Rivers State, seemingly compounded his efforts to convince the tribunal that election actually took place in Khana on April 11.
Peterside’s lawyer Chief Akin Olujimi faulted the witness’ deposition where he failed to mention the absence of card readers and other electoral materials during the election. Olujimi exposed the contradictions in his written and oral evidence. Peter agreed that card readers were not used for the election, as accreditation was done manually. Like others, he also refused to read from exhibits that showed that neither was there an election nor voters’ register in that unit.
Another drama centered on attempt by lawyer to the PDP, Ifedayo Adedipe, to shield one of the witnesses from being confronted with an earlier admitted document made by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The tribunal overruled Adedipe’s objection on the ground that it was premature. Justice Ambrosa held that such objection should be reserved till the final address stage.
Also, Ambrosa, at a point, cautioned lawyers from the respondents’ camp to desist from whispering to witnesses before the tribunal.
“We (lawyers in the case) should be careful. We (tribunal members) are not here to destroy anybody. Why carry other people’s case on your head? If you are not careful, you will have stroke in few days,” Justice Ambrosa said.
Wike and INEC’s main task is to ‘rubbish’ evidence by witnesses for Peterisde, which include soldiers, policemen and even INEC members of staff. One of the witnesses, Mr Tafa Michael, a Superintendent of Police, who was on election duty on April 11 in Tai Local Government Area of Rivers State, told the tribunal that his men caught agents of the PDP thumb-printing in a house opposite their party’s secretariat at Seme in Tai Local Government Area.
The police officer told the Justice Suleman Ambrosa-led tribunal that over 70 persons, including PDP agents, INEC members of staff, the commission’s ad hoc staff and other individuals were arrested by his men shortly after noon on election day and were taken to their office.
Another witness, an officer of the Department of State Security, Mr. Godwin Mba, revealed that cult groups and thugs spearheaded the violence and carnage that marred the April 11 governorship election in Rivers State.
There were many others from the close to 60 witnesses that Peterside called. All damning. These are what Wike is trying to rubbish with the likes of Apah and Samson. And the drama has been interesting. Five more days of drama may lie ahead.
The Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Ado-Ekiti, the Ekiti State capital, yesterday upheld the victory of the Deputy Senate Minority Whip, Senator Abiodun Olujimi.
Mrs. Olujimi, of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), was declared winner of the Ekiti South senatorial seat in the March 28 National Assembly poll conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Her return was challenged by the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Anthony Adeniyi, on the grounds that the first respondent (Olujimi) was a public officer at the time she contested the election.
Adeniyi claimed that Mrs. Olujimi did not resign as a commissioner on the board of the Nigeria Communications Commission (NCC) within the constitutional provision of at least 30 days before election.
He urged the tribunal to determine that the senator was not duly elected and that he be declared winner.
In the judgment delivered by a member of the three-man panel, Justice P.A. Obayi, the tribunal took judicious notice of the first petitioner’s testimony that the election was free, fair and credible.
The tribunal said evidence showed that Mrs. Olujimi, a non-executive member of the NCC board on part-time basis, was not employed in the public service as claimed by the first petitioner.
The jury held that the PDP senator was not a public servant as envisaged in the First Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
“The petition lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed”, Justice Obayi concluded.
