The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Tribunal

  • Akwa Ibom tribunal orders INEC to open defence

    The Akwa Ibom State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to open its defence in the petition challenging the election of Governor Udom Emmanuel.

    The APC governorship candidate, Mr Umana Okon Umana, sued Emmanuel of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging his declaration as winner of the April 11 poll.

    Tribunal Chairman Justice Sadiq Umar gave the directive at yesterday’s resumed hearing as Emmanuel and PDP closed their case.

    Counsel to PDP Mr Taiyo Oyetibo told reporters that the party was satisfied with the witnesses.

    Oyetibo said the merit of a suit depended on the quality of witnesses the parties presented.

    He said: “Actually, it is not the number of witnesses you called, but the quality of the evidence.

    “And, having assessed the quality of the evidence we have laid so far, we are satisfied that we are on a solid ground to close our case.”

    Lawyer to the governor Mr Effiong Effiong hailed their witnesses.

    Effiong said the witnesses testified that election actually took place in Akwa Ibom State.

    The petitioner’s lawyer Dayo Akinlaja said the first and second respondents called 23 witnesses.

    He said: “It is too early for one to say one way or the other. But the important thing is that we are comfortable with the way the proceedings are going.”

    The tribunal adjourned sitting till today for continuation of the hearing.

  • New tribunal panel in Ondo

    A new tribunal panel has been constituted to hear the petition by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and two of its candidates in Akure South (Festus Aregbesola) and Ilaje II (Gbenga Edema).

    This followed the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Akure, which ordered the Court’s President to set up a new panel to hear the petitions afresh and set aside the dismissal of the petitions by the Justice Anthony Ogar-led tribunal.

    The Appeal Court held that it was usurpation of the power of the court for the tribunal to reverse its ruling without a successful appeal.

    The tribunal raised an objection to the petitions and thereafter dismissed the petitions without hearing the substantive petition.

    But the Appeal Court ruled that the application for pre-hearing by the petitioners’ counsel, Charles Titiloye, was properly filed under the Electoral Act and the petition ought not to have been dismissed or held to have been abandoned.

    It also ordered the accelerated hearing of the petition before the new tribunal.

    But the tribunal could not sit on Friday because it did not meet the required quorum of three judges.

  • Ondo Tribunal upholds lawmaker’s election

    Ondo Tribunal upholds lawmaker’s election

    The Ondo state Elections Petition Tribunal Friday upheld the re-election of a member of the House of Representatives representing Ondo East/West federal constituency of the state, Mr Joseph Akinlaja of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    The three-man tribunal in its verdict dismissed the petition filed by the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the March 28, 2015 House of Representatives election, Mr Olabamidele Olanubi for lacking merit.

    The APC candidate had in his petition prayed the tribunal to nullify the election of Akinlaja on the grounds that the election was characterized with irregularities and non-compliance to the electoral Act.

    In the judgment delivered by Justice A.B. Akogun, the tribunal ruled that the petitioner failed to tender credible evidence, or call credible witnesses to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt that the election that produced Akinlaja was characterized with irregularities.

    The tribunal also held that the PDP candidate scored the highest lawful votes cast in the poll contrary to claim by the APC candidate.

    In their reactions, the APC candidate and his lead counsel Dr Tunji Abayomi expressed dissatisfaction with the judgment, insisting that the verdict would be challenged at the Court of Appeal.

    However, Akinlaja said the judgment had justified that he was duly re-elected by the people of Ondo East/West Federal Constituency to represent them at the National Assembly which is currently doing.

    In a related development, the judgment on the petition seeking the nullification of the election that produced another PDP member representing Ilaje/Ese Odo Federal Constituency at the Federal House of Representatives, Hon Kolade Akinjo will be delivered on October 6, 2015 as the tribunal has reserved its ruling till then.

    The Tribunal Chairman, Justice Ojobor Ogar, fixed the date for the final judgment after the submissions of both parties during the sitting of the court.

    The petitioner, Mr Orimisan Ayedatiwa of the APC asked the court to declare him as duly elected lawmaker, noting that Akinjo of the PDP was not qualified to contest the election under of the platform of PDP because he was still a member of the Labour Party as at when the poll was conducted on March 28, 2015.

    The petitioner, Mr Orimisan Ayedatiwa of the APC asked the court to declare him as the duly elected lawmaker, noting that Akinjo of the PDP was not qualified to contest the election on the platform of the PDP because he was still a member of the Labour Party (LP) as at the time the poll was conducted on March 28, 2015.

    In his submission, Counsel to the APC, Mr Yinka Orokoto said he had submitted enough evidence to show that the PDP lawmaker was not duly registered as the PDP member when he got the party’s ticket on the 6th of November, last year.

    However, Akinjo’s counsel, Mr Olabanji Ayenakin insisted that his client properly left the LP and he was registered by the PDP before he was given the ticket to contest.

  • Wike, Rivers PDP can’t stop trial, says tribunal

    Wike, Rivers PDP can’t stop trial, says tribunal

    •’Appeal Court ordered accelerated hearing, not stay of proceedings’

    Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike and his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) failed yesterday to stall proceedings at the governorship election petition tribunal in Abuja.

    The tribunal, in two rulings, refused the proposal by Wike and his party that it stayed  proceedings in the petition by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate  Dakuku Peterside.

    Tribunal Chairman Justice Mohammed Ambrosa observed that against the request by Wike and PDP that the tribunal must first rule on their pending applications, the Court of Appeal,  last week, did not order a stay of proceedings, but ask the tribunal to accelerate hearing in the petition.

    Wike and the PDP had appealed three earlier decisions of the tribunal made on July 9, 29 and 31 that it would, while deciding the petition, resolve issues relating to the petition raised by the respondents.

    On Monday, the petitioners were expected call their witnesses, when respondents’ lawyers informed the tribunal that the Court of Appeal in Abuja delivered judgments last Saturday directing that the tribunal should deliver its rulings on the respondents’ motions pending before it before resuming the trial.

    But, when the respondents were unable to produce certified true copies of the judgments and enrolled orders of the judgments, the tribunal adjourned to yesterday and requested that the CTC of the appellate court’s judgments be filed before the tribunal on Tuesday to enable it determine what next step to take.

    Yesterday, although petitioners’ lawyer, Akin Olujinmi (SAN) said he was yet to obtain copies of the judgments and enrolled orders, the tribunal confirmed that it was in receipt of the enrolled orders, which Justice Ambrosa later read,

    The appeal against the tribunal’s ruling of July 9 partially succeeded, following which the Court of Appeal set aside the ruling and ordered the tribunal to hear the application leading to this appeal. It also ordered the tribunal to accord the case accelerated hearing.

    The appeal against the ruling of succeeds in part, to the effect that the tribunal was ordered “to resolve the issue of the locus standi of the petitioners and the issue of service of the originating processes raised by the appellants, but which were not decided.”

    On the appeal against the tribunal’s ruling of July 31, the Court of Appeal  set aside the ruling to the effect that “the decision of the tribunal that the motion filed by the appellant on July 1st and argued, will be heard along with the petition is hereby set aside.

    “The tribunal is hereby ordered to consider the arguments already proffered for and against and deliver a ruling.”

    After reading the ruling, Justice Ambrosa said “it is our view that the orders (of the Court of Appeal) are clear and unambiguous. We shall comply with them promptly. With respect to the last order, we shall accord the matter accelerated hearing. That being the position of things, we hereby call on the petitioners to continue with their case.”

    Olujinmi was about to call his witness as ordered by the tribunal when lawyer to the PDP, Adedayo Adedipe (SAN) sprang up and demanded that the tribunal first comply with the ruling of the Court of Appeal before proceeding with the trial.

    “The tribunal ought to determine the applications that the Court of Appeal ordered it to determine first before continuing with the trial,” Adedipe said.

    He argued that the non-resolution of the pending issues will amount to reinstating the status quo of the order granted, which resulted in the appeal. He said proceeding with trial will render the order of the Court of Appeal nugatory.

    Wike’s lawyer, Emmanuel Ukala  (SAN) argued in similar vein, arguing that with the orders of the Court of Appeal, proceeding with the calling of witnesses will not amount to complying with the appellate court’s orders.

    “I am equally wondering that orders relating to the hearing of the motion on the determination of the issue of locus standi and the competence of the originating processes, is also being put at serious risk of being breached,” Ukala said.

    Responding, Olujinmi urged the court to ignore Adedipe and Ukala and proceed with the trial, He said should any of them feel uncomfortable with the tribunal’s decision,  he has the option of appealing.

    Ruling, Justice Ambrosa said the tribunal, having elected to proceed with trial, will not reverse itself. He noted that the case, being an election matter, time was of the essence and the tribunal could not afford to waste time.

    The petitioners later called some witnesses, among whom, was Clinton Ochonma, who acted as Ward Collation agent for the APC during the election. All the witnesses were unanimous that the election was marred by irregularities.

    Trial in the case resumes today.

     

  • Tribunal rejects Amosun’s, APC’s prayers to quash Isiaka’s petition

    The Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abeokuta, the Ogun State capital, for the second time struck out Governor Ibikunle Amosun’s application, asking it to dismiss the petition of the Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) governorship candidate, Gboyega Nasiru Isiaka.

    It also struck out a similar petition brought before it by Amosun’s party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), seeking dismissal of Isiaka’s petition.

    The applications were anchored on Section 6 and Section 36 (6) of the constitution and paragraphs 18 (1) – (4), 47 (1) and 53 (5) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2010 as amended.

    The applicants had in the motion on notice, asked the court to set aside the whole proceedings and report of the pre-trial session of the petition that was closed on July 13 or dismiss it for reason of irregularities, incompetence and lack of jurisdiction of the tribunal to determine the petition as constituted.

    The two applications were brought separately by Amosun and APC yesterday, but none succeeded, as the tribunal Chairman, Justice Henry Olusiyi, said the applications were not only an abuse of court processes, but also an unnecessary waste of the tribunal’s time.

    In countering the applications, Isiaka’s counsel, Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN), argued that the issues raised in the applications were not true and that they had also been treated by the tribunal in similar separate applications earlier by the applicants.

    Justice Olusiyi held that the applications were attempts to re-litigate on matters long settled  earlier by the same tribunal.

    He said: “By these applications, the first and second respondents are asking us to sit on an appeal over our ruling of July 7 and July 30. The two issues raised in the two applications have been decided upon one way or the other.

    “The normal and proper thing for the first and second respondents to have done was to appeal and not to bug us down with these applications. This is no doubt an abuse of court process. These applications are an attempt to re-litigate matters that this tribunal has long settled.

    “It is an abuse of judicial processes and unnecessary waste of tribunal’s precious time. The application are bereft of merit and substance. These applications failed and are dismissed.”

    Ealier, counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Oluwajare Ogunnaike, opened and  closed his defence without calling his witness.

    He told the court that he was still not able to reach his witness since he was moved out of Ogun State and appealed that the case be adjourned till Thursday when the witness might be available, but his plea was turned down by the court.

    The case was, however, adjourned till September 29 for the adoption of final written addresses by the parties.

     

     

     

     

  • Tarzoor v Ortom: Tribunal reserves judgment

    The Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal, sitting in Makurdi, the Benue State capital, has reserved judgment in the petition by Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) candidate in the April 11 election, Prince Terhemen Tarzoor, challenging the declaration of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Samuel Ortom, as winner of the poll.

    The tribunal reached the decision after the parties adopted the final written addresses and argued the preliminary objection by Ortom, APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the first, second and third respondents.

    Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN), who led a team of lawyers for the first respondent, urged the tribunal to dismiss the petitioner’s case because “it is incompetent”.

    The eminent lawyer averred that Tarzoor’s petition was not signed by a legal representative.

    He described Tarzoor as a meddlesome interloper in APC’s affairs because he was not an aspirant on the party’s platform but only relied on hearsay to conclude that Ortom was not a member of the APC and was not sponsored by the party.

    Akintola said the petitioner failed to prove his case, adding that there was no countable relief before the tribunal that was grantable in the matter.

    The lawyer urged the tribunal to dismiss same because the petition lacked merit, was frivolous and abandoned.

     

     

    In moving his motion on notice, which sought the dismissal of the petition, APC’s lead counsel, Sabastine Hon, averred that the petitioner was caught by the principle of Res Judicata (a matter already adjudicated by a competent court and may, therefore, may not be pursued by the same parties) and the reason for the preliminary objection.

    Hon said it was a settled law that what affects a political party affects its candidate.

    The eminent lawyer noted that since the PDP’s suit at the Federal High Court in Makurdi Judicial Division, which was questioning the qualification of Ortom to contest the election was struck out, Tarzoor, a candidate of the PDP, could not return with the same reliefs before the tribunal.

    He cited the case of Okorocha v PDP, decided by the Supreme Court, 2014 7NWLR Part 1406 P. 213, particularly at P. 262, wherein the apex court held that candidates and political parties are inseparable.

    Addressing the tribunal on the substantive petition, Hon submitted that first principal witness (PW1) called by the petitioner, irreparably destroyed the case when he admitted that INEC, the only eyewitness to APC congress, left a day before the final day of the rescheduled APC governorship congress held last December.

    The lawyer said the avalanche evidence before the tribunal showed that APC conducted its congress on December 11.

    He added that since Tarzoor was not and is not a member of the APC and did not contest governorship election on the platform of the APC, he lacked the locu standi to invoke the provisions of the Electoral Act.

    Hon urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition.

    Counsel to INEC, Prof Tony Ijohor, urged the court to dismiss the petition.

    The law expert argued that since the petitioner was not praying for a fresh election and had not contested the result of the poll, his petition was incompetent.

    He said the tribunal lacked the jurisdiction to grant the reliefs the petitioner was sought therein.

    According to him, there are no facts to support grounds two and three of the petition, hence the petitioner cannot seek solace under the canopy of severance of pleadings without a formal application.

    Prof Ijohor cited Gundiri v Nyako, 2NWLR Part 1931 P. 211 at 284 and 285, decided by the Supreme Court.

    The law expert urged the court to invoke the presumption regularity with respect to the nomination of Ortom by virtue of sections 167 and 168 of the Evidence Ac.

    He urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition and hold that Ortom is a member of the APC, sponsored by the party and returned winner, having scored majority of lawful votes in the April 11 poll.

    But Tarzoor’s lawyers, led by Adebayo Adenipekun, submitted that the petitioner never took action against the first respondent.

    Adenipekun said it was a settled law that the appropriate place to ventilate the issue of qualification is the election petitions tribunal.

    The lawyer said the first respondent was not sponsored by the APC and was not a member of the party at the time of the election.

    He said the APC did not hold a valid governorship primary, adding that the court should allow his petition.

    The tribunal’s chairman Justice Elizabeth Karatu reserved judgment to a date to be communicated to the parties.

     

     

     

     

  • Tribunal upholds Okwu’s election in Benue

    Tribunal upholds Okwu’s election in Benue

    The National and State Houses of Assembly Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Makurdi on Tuesday upheld INEC’s return of Mr. Samson Okwu as House of Representatives member-elect.

    Okwu contested the election for Oju/Obi Federal Constituency of Benue on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    However, Mr Etukwu Onah of All Progressives Congress (APC) had dragged Okwu and Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) before the tribunal on allegation of irregularities at the March 28 National Assembly election for the constituency.

    The petitioner also alleged that INEC was wrong to have returned Okwu as the lawful winner of the said poll.

    In her judgement, Justice Mosumola Dipeolu-led tribunal held that the petitioner failed to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubt.

    According to the Judge, the petitioner made allegations and the onus of proof rested on him but he failed to lead evidence to prove his case.

    She also held that the testimonies of most of the petitioner’s witnesses were contradictory, adding that they were based on mere hearsay, which could not be relied upon in law.

    Dipeolu, therefore, dismissed the petition for lacking in merit.

    Counsel to Okwu, Mr Samson Udaga, had earlier questioned the basis of the petition.

    Udaga cited Sections 47 and 53 of the first schedule to the Electoral Act 2010 in his defense.

    According to Okwu the petitioner made criminal allegations on individuals, who are not parties in the matter.

    He also urged the tribunal to strike out the petition.

    Counsel to Etukwu, Mr Eje Ochuokpa, had objected to the preliminary objection citing Section 137(3) of the Electoral Act, 2010.

    He told the tribunal that the entire body of the petition did not contain any name other than INEC officials, saying that it was unnecessary to join them individually.

  • Tribunal to retry Ondo APC petitions

    Tribunal to retry Ondo APC petitions

    Following the ruling of the Court of Appeal sitting in Akure, Ondo state capital that set aside the verdict of the National and state Houses of Assembly Tribunal which originally dismissed the two petitions of the All Progressives Congress(APC) candidates, the State Assembly Tribunal has fixed Friday for continuation of the pre-trial of the petitions.
    In a petition no EPT/Ak/HA/7/2015,the APC candidate for Ilaje Constituency 11,Gbenga Edema is challenging his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) counterpart, Coker Malachi on the outcome of the April 11 State Assembly poll in the constituency.

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had earlier declared the election inconclusive because of alleged irregularities.

    APC’s lawyer, Charles Titiloye confirmed the service of hearing notice of the petition scheduled for High Court Eight, Akure, the state capital on Friday, September 15.

  • Delta poll: Tribunal admits election results as evidence

    Delta State Governor Ifeanyi Okowa, on Friday, failed to stop the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate, Olorogun O’tega Emerhor, from presenting the governorship election result sheets used in the April 11 election from the 25 local government areas.

    The APC candidate approached the tribunal, challenging the election of Okowa of the People Democratic Party (PDP).

    At the resumed hearing on Friday, APC’s lawyer, Thompson Okpoko (SAN), while examining his witness, Ore Ohimor, said he would tender forms EC8A, EC8D and EC8E, that is, the state, local government and unit-by-unit election result sheets for the 25 local government areas.

    But Ken Mozie (SAN), lawyer to Okowa, opposed the moved.

    The lawyer argued that the documents sought to be tendered were not neither pleaded nor listed in the witnesses’ statement on oath.

    He averred that the documents listed in the witnesses’ statement on oath are: forms EC8D and EC8E, not form EC8A.

    Mozie said any attempt to tender form EC8A would amount to subverting due process and obtaining justice through the backdoor.

    He said: “We object to the admissibility of these documents. The fundamental foundational requirements were not met. In paragraph 14 of the witnesses’ statement, only forms EC8D and EC8E were pleaded. In their reply to our reply, it was not pleaded; no reference was made to the document sought to be tendered. Therefore, listing the document will not cure it, if it was not accommodated in their pleading.”

    Counsel to PDP, Timothy Kehinde (SAN), noted that it was an elementary principle of law to put the parties on notice and not by surprise.

    The lawyer said the document sought to be tendered should be specifically pleaded.

    He said an “unpleaded” document cannot be admitted even when the document was mentioned in the witnesses’ statement.

    According to him, the document was not mentioned in the witnesses’ statement on oath; neither was it pleaded.

    INEC’s lawyer, O. Anumonye, averred that “the document sought to be tendered by APC and Emerhor were not referred to in the witnesses’ deposition”.

    He added: “Having pleaded over voting by tendering forms EC8D and form EC8E, pleading form EC8A will constitute springing a surprise.”

    But Okpoko said Form EC8A was listed among the documents to be tendered, adding that the documents were identified on paragraphs seven and eight of the petition.

  • Saraki to tribunal: quash petition against me

    Saraki to tribunal: quash petition against me

    Senate President Bukola Saraki has prayed the Legislative Houses Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Ilorin, the Kwara State capital, to dismiss the petition filed by his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) opponent, Alhaji Abdulrahman Abdulrasaq, on the March 28 National Assembly election.

    Saraki’s counsel, Yusuf Ali (SAN), predicated his demand on alleged faulty forensic report presented by the PDP candidate to the tribunal.

    Abdulrasaq challenged the victory of Saraki as the winner of the Kwara Central Senatorial District, claiming he had the majority votes and should be declared winner.

    The tribunal had admitted a forensic report in evidence against Saraki in the petition.

    Four volumes of the report of the forensic analysis carried on electoral materials used in four local governments in Kwara Central were marked as ‘Exhibits P4’.

    Ali averred that the report was dated March 28, 2014, a year before the election poll was conducted.

    He told the Justice Josiah Majebi-led threeman tribunal that “the date shows the document was prepared in anticipation of the election”.