Labour Party today watched in horror as another absurdity played out in Enugu where the Governorship Tribunal dismissed allegations of NYSC certificate forgery against the PDP candidate, Peter Mbah.

The tribunal also struck out our party’s allegation of over-voting, bypass of BVAS while insisting that Peter Mbah was duly elected as governor by majority of lawful and valid votes cast at the election.

Though we will seek redress at Court of Appeal immediately knowing that justice was miscarried in this particular case and that the tribunal judgement can not stand however we are worried about the level of degeneration in our judiciary where ridiculous rulings are frequently churned out from the hallowed temple of justice.

Our case before the tribunal was a clear case of electoral robbery where we pointed out that in Enugu, after the collation of 16 LGAs out of the 17 LGAs of the state, our candidate, Chijioke Edeoga, was leading with over 11,000 votes, surprisingly, the PDP in Enugu, working in cahoots with the INEC, shockingly and provocatively wrote and awarded to the PDP a whopping 30,000 votes at Nkanu East LGA, the LGA of the PDP candidate.

We pointed out that the figures from the INEC BVAS, Nkanu East LGA recorded a total number of 15,000 accredited voters on election day. However, when votes were declared, the PDP was allocated a total number of 30,350 votes while a total number of 1,855 was credited to the Labour Party. So, we asked how could INEC have turned out over 33,000 votes in a place where only about 15,000 voters were accredited.

We had also asked the tribunal to disqualify the PDP candidate for presenting a fake NYSC certificate. The athourity of NYSC confirmed that the PDP candidate absconded from service and that the certificate he parades was not issued by them. Doesn’t that seems like an open and close case, yet the tribunal saw nothing in a clear case of electoral forgery and perjury.

In the wake of this judgement, we were aware of series of visits made by Mba to Aso Rock and we also took note of his level of confidence lately. However, we had ignored these ominous signs while hoping that the blind Lady of Justice will act impartially but we are shocked with this judicial endorsement.

Labour Party may be weeping today for this travesty of justice meted at us but we do not know whose turn it would be tomorrow. Evil they say triumph when the righteous keep silent and when they refuse to condemn it. We also think that the judiciary has a key role to play in keeping our democracy alive and safe. We therefore call for a concerted effort by all well meaning Nigerians to guide this all important arm of government and ensure that it is not captured by the state. We must all rise to save our democracy.

SIGNED;

Barr. Julius Abure

National Chairman
Labour Party
21-09-2023.

The All Progressives Congress (APC) 2023 Senatorial Candidate for Benue South, Comrade Daniel Onjeh, yesterday filed an appeal at the Appeal Court, Makurdi, seeking to nullify the judgment of the National and State Assembly Elections Petition Tribunal, which affirmed the victory of Sen. Patrick Abba Moro of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) at the 25th February, 2023 Senatorial Election in Benue Zone C Senatorial District (also known as Benue South).

Advertorial

A three-member panel of the National and State Houses of Assembly Elections Petition Tribunal Holden in Makurdi, Benue State, led by Hon. Justice ORY Zik-Ikeoha, had on 10th September, 2023, dismissed Onjeh’s petition with Petition No: EPT/BN/SEN/05/2023, challenging the outcome of the Benue South 2023 Senatorial Election in which INEC declared Sen. Moro winner, and Com. Onjeh the 1st runner-up. The petition had Onjeh and the APC as petitioners, and Sen. Abba Moro, the PDP and INEC as respondents.

In their ruling, the three-member panel of the Tribunal held that the petitioners failed to prove in their petition, allegations of non-qualification and not being duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election against Sen. Moro, as well as allegations of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, in the conduct of the 25th February, 2023 Senatorial Election in Benue State against INEC.

But Onjeh, in a swift response, took to his social media channels including Facebook, to announce that, “IT’S NOT OVER YET,” as his lawyers were studying the judgment of the Tribunal and would advice on his next course of action. Subsequently, he filed a four-ground Notice of Appeal yesterday at the Court of Appeal, Makurdi Judicial Division, challenging the entire decisions of the Tribunal.

The former President of the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) and former Chairman, Governing Board of the Projects Development Institute (PRODA), Enugu, through his team of lawyers led by Mr. Adetunji Oso, argued that the Elections Petitions Tribunal’s ruling on his petition occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice, by upholding Sen. Moro’s victory at the 25th February, 2023 polls. Onjeh is consequently asking the Appeal Court to set aside the declaration and return of the 1st Respondent, and declare him as the person that scored lawful majority votes cast in the election.

Onjeh is further asking the Appeal Court to set aside the declaration and return of the 1st Respondent on the ground that he did not score majority lawful votes because the votes credited to the 1st Respondent were wasted in law, hence declare him as the winner of the election of the Benue South Senatorial District held on 25th February, 2023; or alternatively, to set aside and annul the election on the ground that the election was invalid by reasons of non compliance and irregularities, and order a re-run election in the Benue South Senatorial District.

In the seven-page document dated 18th September, 2023 filed at the Court of Appeal, Makurdi, Onjeh’s lead counsel, Mr. Oso, argued that the National and State Assembly Elections Petition Tribunal holding in Makurdi erred in law in holding that the 1st Respondent, Sen. Moro, was eminently qualified to have participated in the election of 25th February, 2023; and that the argument by the Petitioners that the 1st Respondent, by supplying his place of birth as reflecting two (2) separate autonomous communities, was certainly NOT a ground to disqualify the 1st Respondent.

Mr. Oso argued that the Petitioners/Appellants’ case before the Tribunal was on presentation of forged certificates to INEC, adding that whereas the Petitioners/Appellants produced in evidence two certificates showing that one was a forgery of the other, the 1st Respondent did not give evidence or explain the forgery. Mr. Oso therefore contended that presentation of forged certificates to INEC is a disqualifying factor for anybody contesting for election created by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) including the election into the Senate, which the 1st Respondent contested for.

On another ground of appeal, Mr. Oso informed the upper court that the learned trial Judges of the Tribunal misdirected themselves when they held that, “…the Law requires the petitioners to plead the arithmetical figures contained in the result sheet, specifying the Polling Units and Wards in which the alleged errors occurred. It was our observation, upon going through the pleadings contained in the Petition that the Petitioners failed in this duty.”

On the particulars of misdirection, he contended that the Petitioners/Appellants indeed pleaded the Polling Units, Wards and Local Governments where the irregularities and non compliance occurred during the election into the Benue South Senatorial District held on 25th February, 2023. He added that the Petitioners/Appellants pleaded arithmetical figures contained in the result sheets as recorded for each candidate and also tendered the result sheets; and that the Petitioners/Appellants again pleaded arithmetical figures showing the invalid votes, the effect of invalid votes on the overall results declared by INEC for each candidate and how the 1st Petitioner/Appellant scored majority of lawful votes.

Further in his appeal, Com. Onjeh held that the learned Trial Judges of the Tribunal erred in law by holding thus, “…It was my observation that the quality of witnesses fielded by the Petitioners fell far below expectation in terms of their adducing credible and convincing evidence to relate or tie all the numerous documents tendered before this Tribunal…”

Onjeh argued that the Petitioners/Appellants’ witnesses were called to and indeed demonstrated the irregularities and non compliance that occurred in the pleaded Polling Units in the Petition, adding that apart from the oral testimony of the Petitioners/Appellants’ witnesses, the documentary evidence before the Tribunal as per the Petitioners/Appellants exhibits manifestly disclosed the irregularities and non compliance pleaded and complained of in the Petition.

He informed the Court of Appeal that the Petitioners/Appellants’ documentary evidence showing manifest, irregularities and non compliance were specifically pleaded in relation to specific Polling Unit and admitted without objection as found by the Tribunal, and that the Tribunal did not evaluate the Petitioners/Appellants’ documentary evidence which the Tribunal found to be duly Certified True Copies in relation to Section 137 of the Electoral Act and relevant provision to First Schedule to the Electoral Act.

On the fourth ground of Onjeh’s appeal, he held that the learned trial Tribunal erred in law in holding that, “… the totality of the evidence adduced by the Petitioners is weak, porous and lacking in substance; and cannot sustain the reliefs sought by the Petitioners; may not even in the alternative of ordering for a fresh election. He argued that the 1st Respondent admitted the unexplained unlawful alterations, mutilation and cancelations that occurred in the Polling Units pleaded were/are apparent and manifest on the face of the documentary evidence before the Tribunal without challenge. He added that The Petitioners/Appellants did not tender any of their exhibits from the bar as found by the Tribunal.

Onjeh also contended that all the Petitioners’/Appellants’ witnesses identified the exhibits tendered by the Petitioners/Appellants, linked the exhibits to the non compliance and irregularities pleaded and were duly cross examined.

He further argued that the same Tribunal had in another similar Petition before it, held that Section 137 of the Electoral Act, 2022 applies in favour of a Petitioner where the non-compliance and irregularities are manifest and obvious, but did not make any findings in his Petition as to whether the Petitioners/Appellants documentary evidence discloses manifest non-compliance and irregularities.

Ondo State House of Assembly says it has given the state Deputy Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, a seven-day ultimatum to respond to the corruption allegations against him.

The Chairman, Ondo State House of Assembly Committee on Information, Oshati Olatunji, stated this during an interview on Channels TV’s Politics Today.

Advertorial

The House of Assembly had said that it had begun the process of removing the deputy governor.

The House accused Lucky Aiyedatiwa of gross misconduct while in office as the acting governor when Governor Rotimi Akeredolu was on three-month sick leave abroad.

Olatunji said, “There are allegations against the deputy governor bordering on misappropriation of funds. We are duty bound as legislators to do our job. We are not witch-hunting anybody.

“This includes a N30 million allegation and violation of the constitution. What we are saying is that he should give us a reply to these allegations within seven days.”

The governorship election petition tribunal sitting in Jos, has upheld the election of Governor Caleb Mutfwang of Plateau State.

Advertorial

Mutfwang, who contested the election under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was declared winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

But Dr. Nentawe Yilwatda, his All Progressive Congress (APC) rival, headed for the court and asked to be declared winner on the grounds that the PDP does not have structure and there was over voting.

Advertorial

The petitioner also asked the court to include the votes of the 14 polling units rejected by INEC.

Delivering judgement, the tribunal led by Justice. R. Irele-Ifineh, held that the issues raised by the petitioner on party structure were pre election matters and the petitioners lacked the jurisdiction to challenge it.

The tribunal also held that PDP actually held a repeat congress on the 25th of September, 2021, in compliance with the order of the Jos High Court delivered by Justice S.P.Gang.

Chief Chris Agu, the Enugu state governorship candidate of the Peoples Redemption Party, PRP, has rejected the verdict of the Enugu governorship election Petitions tribunal.

The three man panel headed by Honourable Justice Kudirat Akano had on Thursday while delivering judgment on the petition filed by Chief Agu against the declaration and return of Peter Mba of the PDP, dismissed his petition for lacking in merit.

Advertorial

The court ruled that PRP could not prove her case as there was no proof that Mbah presented forged certificate of national service.

Chris Agu who is challenging the return of Mbah on the ground of non qualification having presented forged certificate of national service, NYSC, insisted that the election was marred by gross irregularities.

PRP Logo

He noted that the Tribunal erred in law because his petition was not heard on it’s merit and must be challenged at the Court of Appeal.

Advertorial

Aside Labour Party and her governorship candidate, Barr. Chijioke Edeoga, Chief Chris Agu and Peoples Redemption Party, PRP are also challenging the declaration of Mr. Mba by INEC.

Giving their final verdict on the rightful winner of the March 18 governorship election in Enugu, the three man tribunal chaired by Justice Kudirat Murayo Akano dismissed the petition of Chief Chris Agu, candidate of the Peoples Redemption Party, PRP against the return of Peter Mba of the Peoples Democratic Party, as the winner of the election.

Advertorial

The judge dismissed the issue of plea bargain and forged NYSC discharge certificate because of the inability of the petitioner to provide certified true copies of the alleged documents.

The tribunal also held that to prove the issue of forgery, the petitioner must provide the original certificate and the forged one.

Honourable Justice Akano also ruled that Mr. Peter Mbah of the PDP was duly nominated by his party to contest the governorship election and further dismissed the petition for lacking in merit, being incompetent, generic and academic exercise.

Daily Gazette reports that the panel also resolved the issue that Mbah wasn’t elected by majority of lawful votes cast against the petitioner.

The panel averred that that witnesses called by the petitioners couldn’t specify the polling units where the elections didn’t hold nor the results of same mentioned.