The candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the Edo State governorship election, Asue Ighodalo, has announced plans to challenge the Court of Appeal’s ruling affirming Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the September 21, 2024 election.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja had on Thursday dismissed Ighodalo’s appeal and that of his party, upholding the judgment of the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which had earlier validated Okpebholo’s victory. Despite the setback, Ighodalo remains determined to take the matter to the Supreme Court for further adjudication.
In a judgment on Thursday, a three-member panel of the appellate court unanimously held that the appeal by Asue Ighodalo, who was the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the election, and his party was unmeritorious and dismissed it.
The court held that the appellants failed to show that the election tribunal erred in its decision and proceeded to affirm the judgment of the tribunal delivered on April 2.
The court, in a judgment delivered by Justice M. A. Danjuma, dismissed an appeal the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Asuerinme Ighodalo, filed to challenge the outcome of the governorship election that held in the state on September 21, 2024.
The appellate court held that it found no reason to dislodge the May 15 judgment of the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which validated the declaration of Governor Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as winner of the gubernatorial contest.
It will be recalled that the Justice Wilfred Kpochi-led three-member panel dismissed as lacking in merit, petitions by the PDP and its candidate; the Action Alliance (AA) and its National Chairman, Adekunle Rufai Omoaje; as well as a case that was brought before it by the Accord Party (AP) and its own candidate, Dr. Bright Enabulele.
The tribunal held that it found no reason to nullify the outcome of the governorship election declared in favour of the APC and its candidate, Okpebholo.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had declared that Okpebholo of the APC secured a total of 291,667 votes to defeat his closest rival, Ighodalo of the PDP, who got a total of 247,655 votes.
Dissatisfied with the result, the petitioners approached the tribunal, alleging that the election was not conducted in substantial compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.
In the petition marked: EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, PDP and its candidate alleged that Governor Okpebholo did not secure the highest number of lawful votes that were cast at the election.
It was equally the contention of the petitioners that INEC failed to serialise and pre-record some of the sensitive materials that were deployed for the poll, a situation they said aided the rigging of the election in favour of the APC and its candidate.
Specifically, PDP and its candidate alleged that there was wrong computation of results in 765 polling units in the state, even as they produced 19 witnesses that testified and tendered exhibits before the tribunal.
Among the exhibits the petitioners tendered before the tribunal included a total of 153 Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines that were used in 133 polling units.
According to the petitioners, results from the polling units were manipulated at the collation centres, a situation they said resulted in over-voting in Okpebholo’s favour.
However, in its judgment, the tribunal held that the petitioners failed to, by way of credible evidence, establish why the outcome of the election should be set aside.
It held that the onus of proving that Governor Okpebholo was unduly returned by INEC rested squarely on the petitioners, a legal burden it said was not successfully discharged.
According to the tribunal, the PDP and its candidate merely dumped exhibits before it without demonstrating them through competent witnesses as required by the law.
It held that most of the witnesses who testified for the petitioners gave hearsay evidence, stressing that the failure to produce polling unit agents, presiding officers, or voters who participated in the election to testify proved fatal to the case of the petitioners.
The tribunal held that Section 137 of the Electoral Act did not preclude the petitioners from producing necessary and competent witnesses to testify in support of their case.
It further dismissed the contention of the petitioners that, contrary to the provision of Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, INEC failed to pre-record most of the materials that were deployed for the election.
More so, the tribunal held that none of the BVAS machines tendered before it were switched on to demonstrate that the number of votes recorded in the disputed polling units exceeded the total number of accredited voters.
In its verdict, the appellate court upheld the decision of the tribunal.
Meanwhile, Ighodalo, the candidate of PDP, on Thursday, vowed to take his case before the apex court.
