By Taiye Agbaje
The Kogi State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja, on Monday, affirmed the election victory of Gov. Usman Ododo of All Progressives Congress (APC) in the Nov. 11, 2023 Kogi governorship poll.
The three-member panel of justices, headed by Justice Ado Birnin-Kudu, held that the petition was bereft of substance and accordingly dismissed.
Also dismissed is the petition of the People Redemption Party (PRP), which failed to prove that Forms EC8B and EC8D were not prepared for the election of Nov. 11, 2023.
The tribunal held that the petitioners of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and its candidate, Murtala Ajaka, failed to prove the allegations of over-voting and non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022 in the petition.
The panel, in a unanimous, decision held that all the witness evidence filed before it were incompetent and full of inconsistencies.
It also agreed with the submissions of the respondents that the allegations of forgery raised in the petition were pre-election matter, which ought to have been raised 14 days after the documents were submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Kogi had, on Nov. 11, 2023, held its off-cycle election in which Ododo of the APC emerged winner beating his closest rival, Ajaka of the SDP with a wide margin.
Ajaka, dissatisfied with the outcome of the election, had filed a petition before the tribunal, challenging Ododo’s victory.
The case, which commenced in December 2023, came to its highest point on May 13 when SDP, Ajaka, APC, Ododo and INEC adopted their final written addresses, after which the tribunal reserved judgement in the petition.
It would be recalled that INEC, Ododo and his party, APC, had prayed the tribunal to dismiss Ajaka and SDP’s petition in its entirety for being incompetent and lacking in merit.
The trio had, through their lawyers; Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN; Joseph Daudu, SAN and Emmanuel Ukala, SAN, respectively, had told the tribunal so while adopting their final written addresses and presenting their arguments against the petition.
However, Ajaka’s lawyer, Pius Akubo, SAN, had urged the tribunal to discountenance the respondents’ submissions and uphold their petition.
Kogi governorship poll: Tribunal affirms Ododo’s election victory
The Kogi State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja, on Monday, affirmed the election victory of Gov. Usman Ododo of All Progressives Congress (APC) in the Nov. 11, 2023 Kogi governorship poll.
The three-member panel of justices, headed by Justice Ado Birnin-Kudu, held that the petition was bereft of substance and accordingly dismissed.
The tribunal held that the petitioners; the social Democratic Party (SDap) and its candidate, Murtala Ajaka, failed to prove the allegations of over-voting and non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022 in the petition.
The panel, in a unanimous, decision held that all the witness evidence filed before it were incompetent and full of inconsistencies.
It also agreed with the submissions of the respondents that the allegations of forgery raised in the petition were pre-election matter, which ought to have been raised 14 days after the documents were submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Birnin-Kudu said : “I agree with the Respondents that most of the exhibits tendered from the Bar without the makers constitute documentary hearsay..
“This is because any Witness, who must testify before the Tribunal must have his Witness statement on oath, and be allowed to bring and demonstrate evidence tobe made per incuriam..
“Unfortunately, PW1 is not a competent Witness, all documents tendered through him are all expunged!
“PW4, and PW24 did not demonstrate the documents, they could even not, if they want to, because they were not the makers of the documents
“Again ,considering the evidence of the expert witness (PW25), exhibits 1 to 55 and (a lot more) are hereby rejected and expunged from the record
“I agree with respondents that exhibits 1 -207 are inadmissible hearsay as they were tendered from the Bar without linking them with the case or calling the makers, so they attract no probative value.”
He has rejected some documents tendered by the Respondents..but they are of no consequence
On the whether the petition was filed within time, the tribunal chairman held that “it was validly presented and filed within time.”
According to him, no tribunal can engage inquisitorial examination of documents in violation of section 137 of the Electoral Act or paragraph 46(4) of 1st Schedule, which does not avail the petitioners
On the Ododo’s qualification to contest the election, he rejected the qualification documents of the expert witness on the ground that they were not pleaded.
‘The Petitioners failed to prove forgery.. They failed to show that Ododo submitted the documents to INEC. The ground of qualification based on forgery of Affidavit of loss thereby fails.
“Once the Petitioners tie their allegation of forgery to the content or documents attached to INEC Form EC9 submitted to INEC, the matter is clearly a pre-election which the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain.
“Tribunal agrees that the alleged falsified document was not a certificate as an affidavit of Loss is not a document capable of disqualifying the 2nd Respondent .
“Also the evidence to establish non compliance must be of those who witnessed the election or those who made the documents
“In this case, the petitioners abandoned 96.6 of the case they set out to make at the tribunal as the depositions of the Witnesses which were adopted are full of contradictions.
“The 21 Witnesses are not presiding officers or Agents. The Petitioners have therefore failed.
No Witness was fielded in support of the allegations made in respect of Ogori.
“Although two Witnesses, who testified at Ajaokuta, testified that voting went well in his polling unit,
no witness was fielded in support of the allegations made in respect of Ogori.
“PW9, PW10 and PW11 contain material contradiction as they testified that BVAS was used for accreditation contrary to the pleading..
“They did not plead any fact to show that the 2nd Respondent authorised over voting. The failure to plead material facts regarding over voting or acts of non compliance, the Petitioners have failed to prove their case.
“The ward for ward witness statements show that the witnesses who come from different parts of Kogi show that their testimonies were procured
“The entire Expert Evidence/Report is documentary hearsay. No probative value will be placed on same. Section 137 of the Electoral Act is not a magic wand, the Petitioners are to demonstrate their documents and tie them to their case
“Again, the witness who demonstrated the BVAS stated that he could not tell if those machines were the ones deployed in Kogi simply because the Witness was not in Kogi on the day of the election but was in Imo.
“My conclusions is that the petitioners have failed to establish the ground of non compliance.
“Consequently, this petition has failed in its entirety, ” Birnin-Kudu declared. NAN
