Edo Election Petition: Why we called only four witnesses

Kingsley Abavo, Managing Editor Benin

The ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in Edo State has explained why it called only four witnesses in its defence; in the election petition challenging the victory of the Party and its governorship candidate, now the Governor; Senator Monday Okpebholo in the Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory.

The opposition political party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate, Asue Ighodalo are at the Election Petition Tribunal challenging the APC and Governor Okpebholo's victory in the September 21, 2024 Governorship Election as declared by the umpire; Independent Electoral Commission (INEC).

The APC in a swift reaction to the assertions of critics, the PDP and supporters; said the presentation of only four witnesses was deliberate, as according to the dictates of the law, the burden of proof is on the petitioners who have alleged.

Prince Peter Uwadiae Enosorogbe Igbinigie Esq. (Photo credit: hilltopnationaleng.blogspot.com)

Speaking through its State Publicity Secretary, Prince Peter Uwadiae Enosorogbe Igbinigie Esq in Benin on Thursday, 13 February, 2024, the APC said it would have been a waste of precious time of the Tribunal if it had called all of its originally listed 24 witnesses; and also at the same time helping the petitioners to prove their allegations; which is antithetical in law.

"The implications of our actions is that we cannot be seen to be doing the case of the PDP for them," the APC said.

It added that the petitioners' case succeeds or fails depending on the strength of their arguments and evidences before the court.

"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."

The Party says it was satisfied with the performance of its four witnesses.

"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 held.

"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-North-East."

Continuing; the APC points out 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.

It therefore urged the PDP to go read superior legal authorities that has to do with signing.

"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 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.

"So, 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."

Further; the APC lambasted the PDP for orally amending their oath deposition in the middle of the case in court; an act it said has rendered them inconsiquential.

"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.

"Beyond that, the act of telling the APC and Monday Okpebholo to come prove their case further weakened the case of the PDP."

The Party asserts that it decided to close its case on Thursday having substantially done justice to it before the Tribunal.

Expressing confidence in the quality of the Justices of the Tribunal, it said it was its prayers and hope that the Party would be victorious at the end of it all.

"This is because the mandate of the Edo people as expressed on the 21 of September is sacrosanct and cannot be eroded by the callousness and very mundane act of the PDP."

Noting that Edo people are happy with the performance of the Okpebholo led APC Government so far, it was a lie for the PDP to think that it would be victorious at the Tribunal following the self acclaimed victory on the streets even while the Tribunal was yet to give its verdict, the Party said.

While pointing out that media judgement and sensationalism of happening 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.

APC closing its case

"...We have done a further comprehensive review of the evidence led by the petitioners, the evidence received from the petitioners under cross-examination, the evidence led so far by the respondents in this tribunal, the documentary evidence before this tribunal...

"My Lord, we have also considered that time is of essence. The judicial time of this honourable tribunal is precious.

"My Lord, taking all the enumerated factors into serious consideration, we are happy at this stage to close the 3rd respondent’s case as it please Your Lordship,” Chief Ferdinard Orbih, one of the APC counsels told the Tribunal."

Adjournment

Meanwhile, the Justice Wilfred Kpochi-led Tribunal has adjourned to Monday, 3rd March, 2025, for the adoption of written addresses.

Advertisement