The Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, sitting in Abuja, on Monday reversed judgement in the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate last 21 September election, Dr. Asue Ighodalo, challenging the outcome of the election.
At the final hearing, Ighodalo made a commanding appearance as the tribunal adopted final written addresses from all parties — setting the stage for judgement on the disputed governorship election.
In their petition, PDP and Ighodalo are querying the decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to declare Senator Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as winner of the election, which they claimed was marred by irregularities.
Shortly after lawyers to the parties adopted their written addresses and made final submissions on Monday, the three-man tribunal, headed by Justice Wilfred Kpochi, announced that the date for judgement would be communicated to them.
In his final submission, counsel to the petitioners, Mr. Ken Mozia, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), contended that his clients have successfully demonstrated electoral malpractices in 765 polling units out of 4,519 across the state.
He noted discrepancies at various collation levels, where figures on Form EC8A (polling unit results) were allegedly reduced at the ward and local government collation stages (EC8B).
The petitioners’ lawyer added that INEC certified all documents tendered by the petitioners, but failed to present any counter-evidence.
He said: ‘The issue is not about producing an alternative result, but about questioning the validity of the INEC Result Viewing (IReV) portal uploads’.
Mozia argued that election petitions should be determined by the impact of irregularities on the process, not just the percentage of affected polling units.
He then prayed the tribunal to grant all the reliefs in the petition, including the voiding of Okpebholo’s victory.
INEC’s counsel, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN) argued that the petition lacked merit, arguing that the tribunal cannot annul the election because that is not the relief sought by the petitioners
Agabi also argued that the tribunal cannot declare that the petitioners are the winners of the election in the light of their assertion that the election is invalid.
He contended that the ground of non-compliance pleaded by the petitioners is not accompanied by the appropriate consequential relief which would have been for the annulment of the election, adding that that ground is incompetent.
Agabi argued that the number of polling unit agents invited as witnesses by the petitioners are insignificant to represent the number of polling units in Edo State.
He said that the case of the petitioners is founded on analysis of documents and not what happened on the field on the date of the election.
Okpebholo’s counsel, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) described the petition as an ‘academic exercise’, arguing that the documents tendered by the petitioners, including Forms EC25B and EC40A were ‘dumped in the court’ without proper demonstration of their relevance.
He urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition.
Lawyer to the APC, Mr. Emmanuel Ukala (SAN) made similar arguments and prayed the tribunal to reject the petition.
Reacting to the day’s proceedings, a PDP leader in Edo State, Ogbeide Ifaluyi-Isibor expressed satisfaction with the proceedings, adding that the petitioners are confident of a positive outcome.
He noted that the testimonies of the petitioners’ witnesses aligned with their claims, particularly concerning allegations of over-voting and incorrect collation of results in several polling units.
He argued that the number of witnesses presented does not always determine the strength of an election petition, citing Supreme Court decisions that place greater weight on the substance of evidence rather than the volume of testimonies.
He further said: ‘The petitioners are pleased with the proceedings of the court so far. Our counsel effectively demonstrated that testimonies given by witnesses were in consonance with our prayers.
‘We are contesting results in 756 polling units out of over 4,000 in the state. Our arguments before the tribunal were clear, and we believe that we have sufficiently substantiated our claims’.
Former APC National Chairman, Senator Adams Oshiomhole said he was not convinced that the petitioners did enough to warrant the cancellation of the election.
The former governor of the state, who witnessed the tribunal’s proceedings on Monday, argued that, ‘it is the duty of the petitioners to prove their allegations beyond doubt.
‘I am satisfied with how the hearing went, but only the tribunal can determine the outcome’.
Ighodalo’s legal team presented 154 Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines, certified true copies of result sheets, and polling unit records.
INEC, the first respondent, failed to present a single witness to justify the conduct of the election.
