The Edo State Chapter of All Progressives Congress has advanced reasons for calling four witnesses testified before the Election Petition Tribunal where the victory of its party and declaration of the ruling party’s governorship Candidate,
Senator Monday Okpebholo by the Independent National Electoral Commission, is being challenged.
Some members and supporters of Candidate of People Democratic party, Asue Ighodalo
in the September 21, 2024 governorship Election, had belched foul air on social media over the testimonies of four witnesses among 24 witnesses it formerly listed at Tribunal sitting in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory.
In a statement, the Publicity Secretary of the ruling party in Edo State, Peter Uwadiae Igbinigie Esq said the deliberate move was in line with the dictates of the law, which places the burden of proof on the petitioners who have alleged.
He said APC at the same time helping the petitioners to prove their allegations, which is antithetical in law, predicting that the petitioners’ case succeeds or fails depending on the strength of their arguments and evidences before the Tribunal.
While stating that it was satisfied with the performance of its four witnesses, clarified that some grey areas PDP punctured in some results declared by INEC is not sufficient to invalidate the victory of Governor Okpebholo by the court.
“The implications of our actions is that we cannot be seen to be doing the case of the PDP for them.
“Because the matter is quasi criminal, the standard of proof in an election petition is ‘proof beyond every reasonable doubt’.
“What this portends in law is that it is he who alleges that has the responsibility to prove.”
“They have been able to eruditely, and justifiably told the Tribunal that the case of the petitioners does not only lack substance, but it ought not to be looked into, by the court”, it said.
According to him, “First and foremost; the area the PDP complained about that there was over voting; were areas the results of over voting were never collated before the results for the APC and other political parties were collated.
“If the results were never collated; can such over voting form part of a case that has to do with the final result for Okpebholo? And the answer is no!
“This is because if the results were not collated at that unit, it means therefore, there is nothing to contest; that unit has been completely obliterated from the entire result that was collated for the election proper.
“In this case; PDP made heavy weather of what happened at Unit 4, Ward 7 in Ovia – South – West local Government Council Area, of the State, same for Esan North-East, and same for Akoko-Edo.
“For Oredo Local Government Council Area, their complaint was that the results were not signed.”
The APC however acknowledged the assertion of the PDP in its petition; that truly there was over voting in unit 4, Ward 7 in Ovia South – West and Esan North – East.
“But the over voting was discovered before the collation of the final result transmitted to the Local Government Council headquarters, and were never part of it as they were earlier discarded.
“Hence on the result sheet for the unit 4, Ward 7, Ovia-South West Local Government Council, it was entered zero for all the political parties not excluding the PDP and APC.
“That in itself indicates that it ought not be a matter to had come to the Tribunal which the PDP should make a heavy weather about and same for the Esan-South-West.”
Continuing; the APC noted that the PDP complaint in Oredo Local Government Council about the result of the election not being very clear and signed, was not legally valid.
The APC urged the PDP to go read superior legal authorities that has to do with signing.
It said, “Our electoral Act did not make signing a compulsory requirement for results to be valid for an election; some parties may decide not to sign.
“But once INEC; the only legal authority that can judge an election to have been free and fair; find good reason to accept the result as it is, whether a political party agent signed or not; is immaterial.
“So, signing is not mandatory and that is what we called our witnesses to come to do the APC declared; even as the documents presented in court speak for itself, it added.
The APC also said, “The man we called in as our witness in Oredo; Gabriel Iduseri is a seasoned politician; he knows the implication of not signing a result; he knew also that even if a result was not signed, provided INEC accept that result as the true reflection of what happened at that particular local Government Council, it is valid and that was what the young man came to court to say.
“Thereafter, the criticism of the PDP that we could not call witnesses was like telling us to come, do their case for them, they are now afraid.
“They listed over a hundred witnesses and they only succeeded in calling 18 and the 19th witness was the witness of the court. They were expecting the APC, Monday Okpebholo and the INEC would call more witnesses to come better their case.
“But that is antithetical to our jurisprudence; we don’t do that; our lawyer were seasoned enough to have seen those loopholes in their case and knowing fully well that calling more witnesses will be tantamount to doing the case for the PDP, it was better to stop at the point they did to make the job easier for the Tribunal to appreciate”, APC stressed.
“Under the Electoral Act and Evidence Act, you don’t amend an affidavit orally in court, except it is taken back before the Commissioner of oath the affidavit was earlier sworn”, it stated.
“This is as the Nigerian Electoral Act does not allow for amendment after the parties in court have filed their processes.
“So, what the PDP did in respect of those witnesses they called and orally amending depositions of their witnesses in the open court amount to making those depositions irrelevant to their case.
“If these amended depositions are removed from their case, it means that the evidence of these witnesses cannot be looked into by the court as relevant to proving the case of the PDP.
“On the whole, the case of the PDP is not only bereft of substance, it was bereft of substantial witnesses, it was bereft of documents that were proved to ensure that they get victory, they did not call sufficient witnesses to convince the Tribunal that their allegations are meritorious.
Shedding light on ‘media judgement’ and sensationalism of events at the Tribunal would not sway victory on the way of the PDP, the APC stated it was only the merits of facts and evidences before the court that would make the difference.
As the honourable Justices of the Tribunal who it said are very focused; would only look at the credible evidence before it to give its verdict which it strongly believes, would be in its favour.
In the mean time, the Justice Wilfred Kpochi-led three man Tribunal had adjourned to Monday, 3rd March, 2025, for the adoption of written addresses.
Leave a Reply