Follow Us on Google
From Paul Osuyi, Asaba
The Delta State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Asaba on Monday reserved judgment in the petition filed by the candidate of the Labour Party, Mr. Ken Pela, challenging the election of Governor Sheriff Oborevwori of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP).
The three-member tribunal headed by Justice C.H. Ahuchaogu reserved the judgment to a later date after counsels to the respective parties adopted their final written addresses.
While the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is the first respondent, Oborevwori, his deputy, Monday Onyeme and the PDP are the second, third and fourth respondents respectively.
In adopting his final written address dated and filed on September 21, counsel to the petitioners, Mathias Emeribe, urged the tribunal to allow the petition hinged on three grounds of qualification of the second and third respondents; non-compliance in the conduct of the March 18 election; and majority of lawful votes cast.
Emeribe in his argument shifted the burden of proof of non-compliance to INEC, contending the second respondent presented forged documents and that the second respondent did not resign from his public office before the election.
But in adopting his final written address dated and filed on September 18, counsel to the first respondent, A.T. Kehinde, succinctly argued that the petition should be summarily dismissed with cost on the ground that the processes filed by the petitioners were not in consonance with the Practice Direction.
On his part, counsel to the second and third respondents, Samson Egege who also relied on his final written address and his reply to the final address of the petitioners, prayed the tribunal to strike out the petition with substantial cost.
Egege argued that the petitioners hinged their allegation of non-qualification of the second respondent on forged documents submitted to the first respondent in forms F001 and EC9, noting however that the petitioners failed to tender the alleged forged documents in evidence as the tribunal cannot speculate on a weighty criminal allegation of forgery.
“On the qualification of the third respondent, the petitioners in their evidence did not indicate what position he held as contained in their deposition. The resignation tendered by the respondent was out of abundance.
“On the allegation of non-compliance, in addition to their pleadings, the Petitioners’ Witness (PW11) admitted that the allegation is hinged on the alleged failure of INEC to upload results to IReV.
“The second admission by the same witness is that the result sheet which the petitioners tendered contained the same figures as declared by the first respondent.
“We therefore submit that in both pleadings and evidence adduced, the petition lacks substance, it is frivolous and unmeritorious and goes against settled principles of law in both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court,” Egege submitted.
Also praying the tribunal to throw out the petition, counsel to the fourth respondent, Ekeme Owhovoriole, said the petition was patently lacking in merit. He however urged the tribunal to award an effective cost against the petitioners.
