In a significant ruling, the Nasarawa State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal has nullified Abdullahi Sule’s governorship and declared David Umbugadu of the PDP as the winner of the 2023 Nasarawa State governorship elections.
While two of the three justices on the panel led by Justice Ezekiel Ajayi upheld this decision, Justice Ibrahim Mashi is currently delivering a dissenting judgment.
More details later…
The Federal High Court, Abuja on Tuesday, dismissed a suit seeking to disqualify former Petroleum Resources Minister, Timipire Sylva from contesting in the November 11 governorship election in Bayelsa State.
Justice Inyang Ekwo, while dismissing the suit instituted against the All Progressive Congress (APC), Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Sylvia, held that it was lacking in merit and wants of enough meat to warrant disqualification.
According to the judgement, the plaintiff, Hon Isikima Ogbomade Johnson failed to establish the allegation that the APC did not conduct a lawful primary election that produced Sylva.
The court insisted that the INEC’s report was clear beyond any doubt that a valid primary election was conducted by APC and monitored by the electoral umpire as required by law.
On the police reports tendered by the plaintiff which claimed that no primary election was conducted by APC, Justices Ekwo said that the purported police reports were worthless and products of illegality because police were not mandated by any provisions of law to do what they did in favour of the plaintiff.
The Judge, among others, faulted the police reports for not being on police letter head papers to give it semblance of originality while he also said that the duty of police at primary elections is to give protection and safety to election materials and voters.
Besides, Justice Ekwo held that most of the documents brought by the plaintiff were done through the back doors in disregard to the well known established procedures.
Also, the court rejected the suit because it was not instituted within 14 days the subject matter occurred, hence, it became academic matter adding that since court is not an academic institution, it would not dabble into such a matter.
“In all, I find the case of the plaintiff to be weak having not been established by preponderance of evidence as required by law.
“In the same vein, the case of the plaintiff, having been demolished by overwhelming exhibits tendered by APC and Timipire Sylva, has no legs to stand upon in the face of law.
“I make an order, dismissing this case and it is hereby dismissed for lacking in merit,” the Judge held.
The plaintiff had by an originating summons dragged APC, INEC and Sylvia before the Court praying for an order to disqualify Sylva from being allowed to participate in the coming November governorship election in Bayelsa State.
He predicated his grouse against Sylvia on two grounds that Sylva had been elected into governorship office twice, took oath of office and oath of allegiance twice while he also claimed that the April 14 primary election that produced Sylva was illegal and unlawful having been allegedly done in contravention with APC’s guidelines.
The Benue State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, sitting in Makurdi, on Saturday upheld the victory of Governor Hyacinth Alia of the APC in the March 18 Governorship Election.
In an unanimous decision, the tribunal dismissed the petition brought forward by Titus Uba and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
Chairman of the Panel, Justice Ibrahim Karaye, ruled that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to address pre-election issues raised by the petitioners, Titus Uba and the PDP. He clarified that only the Federal High Court had exclusive jurisdiction to handle matters concerning pre-election issues.
Furthermore, he deemed the petitioners’ case as an abuse of court processes, noting that the same case had been filed by them before the Federal High Court Abuja Division, and its judgment had not been challenged.
Justice Karaye also pointed out that the petitioners lacked the legal standing to challenge the nomination of the 2nd and 3rd respondents by the 4th respondent, as they were not members of the 4th respondent.
Additionally, he stated that the petitioners had failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their allegations of forgery against the 3rd respondent.
Concluding the judgment, Justice Karaye affirmed that the 2nd and 3rd respondents were qualified to contest the March 18 Governorship Election, ultimately dismissing the case brought by the petitioners.
The petitioners, Titus Uba and the PDP, had initially taken their grievances to the tribunal, challenging the declaration of the respondents—INEC, Hyacinth Alia, Dr. Sam Ode, and the APC—by INEC.
Their primary arguments centred on the eligibility of the 2nd and 3rd respondents, Governor Alia and Dr. Ode, to participate in the election.
They also alleged irregularities in the nomination of the governorship and deputy governorship candidates by the 4th respondent, the APC. Furthermore, they accused the 3rd respondent of presenting a forged certificate to INEC.
In their plea, the petitioners requested the nullification of the election results and the declaration of themselves as winners, having obtained the second-highest number of lawful votes.
They also called for the invalidation of their votes and the withdrawal of certificates issued to them by INEC due to their purported disqualification.
It’s important to note that the petitioners did not contest the election results but rather the qualifications of the candidates.
However, the respondents argued that the suit should be entirely dismissed as it constituted an abuse of court processes. They emphasized that the Federal High Court Abuja Division had previously ruled on the same matter before the election, and the petitioners had not appealed that judgment.
The respondents further maintained that all the issues raised were pre-election matters, falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.
They contended that the petitioners lacked the legal right to challenge the nominations of candidates from other political parties as they were outsiders in those party affairs.
The Governorship Elections Petition Tribunal, which convened in Jos, North Central Nigeria on Friday, has affirmed the victory of Governor Caleb Mutfwang, a member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), in the Plateau State gubernatorial election.
The tribunal, consisting of three members, issued a unanimous judgment on Friday, ruling against the petitioner on the grounds that the petition lacked merit. The petitioner, who is also the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Nentawe Yilwatda, saw all three of their arguments dismissed by the tribunal.
The election results from March 20, where the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Returning Officer, Prof Idris Amali, declared Mutfwang as the winner with 525,299 votes, were upheld. Yilwatda, the APC candidate, secured 481,370 votes.
The PDP emerged victorious in 10 local government areas, including Barkin Ladi, Bassa, Lantang North, Langtang South, Riyom, Mikang, Mangu, Jos East, Qua’an Pan, and Pokkos. Meanwhile, the APC garnered the highest number of votes in seven local government areas: Jos East, Kanke, Kanam, Pankshin, Shendam, Wase, and Jos North.
This decision by the tribunal solidifies Caleb Mutfwang’s position as the governor of Plateau State, bringing an end to the election dispute.
Stay tuned for more updates on this story.
The National Assembly Elections Petition Tribunal which convened at the Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS) in Lagos has rendered the election victory of Mr. Thaddeus Atta of the Labour Party for the Eti Osa Federal Constituency null and void.
In a pivotal judgment delivered late on Monday evening, the tribunal deemed the elections inconclusive and mandated the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to organize a supplementary election within a 90-day timeframe.
This supplementary election is to be conducted in 33 polling units where the elections failed to proceed as planned.
Responding to the ruling on Tuesday through a post on X (formerly known as Twitter), Atta conveyed that there was no need for alarm. He clarified that he had not been “sacked” by the court, but rather, the Tribunal had merely called for a re-run or supplementary election in the 32 polling units where the election process had been disrupted. He reassured the constituents that he remained unwavering in his commitment to serve Eti Osa and encouraged them to remain calm, stating, “We will get through this together.”
Bankole Wellington (commonly known as Banky W) from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who had been declared the runner-up in the original polls, and Ibrahim Babajide Obanikoro (IBO) from the All Progressives Congress (APC) had both lodged petitions contesting the outcome of the February 25th election. In that initial election, INEC had declared Atta the winner with 24,075 votes, while Banky W and IBO were reported to have garnered 18,668 and 16,901 votes, respectively.
*Dismisses all petitions against him
The Presidential Election Petition Court on Wednesday dismissed all the three petitions filed before the cit which challenged the February 2023 presidential election that produced Ahmed Bola Tinubu as the winner.
The five-man panel led by Justice Haruna Tsunami unanimously held that the petition by Alhaji Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP), Mr Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP)and the Allied Peoples Party (APM) lack merit.
Giving the verdict, the court held that the Petitioners failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt that the presidential election was marred by malpractice and irregularities.
Consequently, the court held that the return of Ahmed Bola Tinubu as elected President by Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is right and subsists.
The 2023 Presidential Elections may have come and gone, but the legal fireworks fanned by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi continue to fiercely burn.
Suffice it to say that it has been a topsy-turvy three weeks at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) as the aggrieved parties battled to drive home their case challenging the declaration of Ahmed Bola Tinubu as the winner of the said election.
On May 8th, the presidential election petition kicked off with five petitions from different political parties which were later consolidated.
In the buildup of the full-blown hearing of the petitions, there was mild drama as two aggrieved parties Action Alliance (AA) and the Action Peoples Party (APP) withdrew their petitions, during the pre-hearing sessions of the petitions.
However, Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Alliance Peoples Movement (APM) continued with the quest to upturn the outcome of the presidential election.
The petitioners were given three weeks to prove their case, after the pre-election reports were delivered on 23rd May 2023, as time allocated for hearing, calling of witnesses and cross-examinations were stated for easy conduct of proceedings.
On July 23rd, Mr Obi and LP closed their case after calling 13 witnesses as against the 50 witnesses registered in their pre-hearing schedule, amongst which they tendered documents, and the total number of registered voters and Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs) collected in 32 states in the lead up to the presidential polls to aid their case.
All their witnesses who were party agents and INEC officials, submitted that accreditation of voters was seamless, but transmission of Presidential election results was difficult, adding that they were made to sign the forms EC8As under duress.
According to the witnesses, all the Labour Party agents totalled 133,000 as against the 176,974 polling units across the country, and they insisted that Peter Obi should be declared winner because he had the most results which were not uploaded as promised by INEC.
Peter Obi and the Labour Party also tendered a report through a subpoenaed witness, Claretta Ogar, who is a cloud engineer and architect and an employee of Amazon Web Services Incorporated, USA.
According to the Star witness, the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election did not experience any glitch that could have affected the e-transmission of results on February 25, 2023.
The report specifically provides details on the health status of the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election.
The document, totaling six copies were admitted by the court amid objections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and the All Progressive Congress (APC).
Also, two subpoenaed witnesses of the Labour Party and Peter Obi, contradicted each other on the powers and responsibilities of the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA, as related to the February 25, 2023 general elections.
Chebuike Ngwoke, a digital cyber-security expert, commissioned to do a cyber-security and risk analysis of the election by the Labour Party, told the court that the International System for Standardization, ISO Certification, is expected to be issued by the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA and to the Independent National Electoral Commission in line with the 2007 Act that established it.
However, another subpoenaed witness of Obi, Emmanuel Edet, a legal officer from NITDA contradicted the position that there was no provision in the NITDA Act that gave the agency that role when he was crossed examined by Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Counsel to Tinubu.
On the part of Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), they had on the 21st of March filed their petitions challenging the emergence of President Bola Tinubu in the February 25 elections.
Closing their case on Friday 23rd June, called a total of 27 witnesses as against 100 submitted in the pre-hearing schedule to prove their case, amongst other documents tendered.
However, speaking to reporters, lead counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Chris Uche SAN, said that the documents tendered took the place of the remaining 73 witnesses.
Some of the notable witnesses called were three Presiding Officers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) who told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that the refusal of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) to transmit the presidential election results on Election Day frustrated their jobs.
The Officers, who were testifying on subpoena, admitted that the results of the Senate and the House of Representatives were transmitted unhindered and that the problems of technical glitches arose at the point of transmitting only the presidential poll results.
The three witnesses are Janet Nuhu Turaki, Christopher Bulus Ardo and Victoria Sani who served as INEC’S Presiding Officers at Yobe, Bauchi and Katsina States, respectfully.
Also among the testifiers was Hitler Uwala, who is a forensic Analyst and he tendered 7 volumes of reports based on the 110 BVAS machines inspected.
Under the evidence in chief, Uwala told the court that the results contained in the 110 BVAS machines he inspected were deleted.
However, while under cross-examination by the INEC counsel, he admitted that he was not in Abuja when the elections were conducted and that nothing was wrong with the BVAS machine when he inspected them.
He added that he didn’t interview any of the election presiding officers and does not know if anything was wrong with the BVAs machine on Election Day.
INEC further told the court that the 110 BVAS machines inspected in the Federal Capital Territory constitute only 3.5% out of the 3163 devices allocated to Abuja and less than 0.06% of the total number of BVAS deployed across Nigeria.
To verify the witness’ claims on deleting of results, INEC’s lawyer brought four BVAS devices for the witness to inspect but he refused saying it was professionally wrong to do that as the figures might have been tampered with.
Uwala added that he can’t identify the BVAs machine given to him as one of those he inspected.
Closing their case, the Prosecution witness 27, Mike Enahoro- Ebah who is a Private Legal Practitioner informed the Presidential Election Petitions Court about a USA judgement for criminal forfeiture of assets by President Bola Tinubu and the cover note authorizing it.
The witness also tendered academic records from Chicago University, a copy of the subpoena served on the Chicago University, the original academic records and degree certificate, an original admission letter, an original transcript from Southwest College to the school Tinubu attended, given to Chicago University with the gender referred to as Female and the extract of a Guinea passport and the certificate of compliance for Tinubu.
Counsel for the petitioner, Chris Uche, SAN, admitted certified copies of Academic and work records of President Bola Tinubu tendered by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar.
The documents include a BSc certificate from the Chicago State University, NYSC Discharge Certificate, and Mobil Nigeria Oil Plc certificate of service.
He noted that the documents were purportedly obtained by Tinubu but bore the name ‘Bola Adekunle Tinubu’.
The witness also tendered forms EC13 and EC9 nomination forms and the letters written to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as attachments.
Counsel to INEC, Abubakar Mahmoud, Tinubu, Emmanuel Ukala and the APC, Lateef Fagbemi, all objected to the admissibility of the documents.
Meanwhile, the Allied Peoples Movement, APM, which is seeking to nullify the election of President Bola Tinubu, closed its case after calling its sole witness.
The witness, Aisha Abubakar, who identified herself as the Assistant Welfare Director of the party, tendered seven batches of documentary evidence before the court to establish their case.
APC’s lead counsel, Lateef Fagbemi, tendered a copy of the Supreme Court judgement which the Respondents said had earlier settled the issue the APM raised in the petition.
The court admitted it as evidence despite Objections from the APM.
The court subsequently adjourned the matter till July 14 for all the parties to adopt their final briefs of argument and APM closed its case.
The Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-man panel adjourned till Monday 3rd July for the INEC to open their defence. Expect more fireworks then!
The Labour Party, LP and it’s presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, on Wednesday revealed that their attempt to serve the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Chairman, Prof Yakubu Mahmoud with a subpoena has been abortive.
The Petitioners, through their Counsel, Livy Uzoukwu SAN, drew the attention of the court to the subpoena which was to furnish them with certain documents.
He added that he spoke to the lead counsel to INEC, Abubakar Mahmoud who promised to help out.
He therefore, asked for an adjournment until tomorrow.
“We have drawn the attention of Abubakar Mahmoud SAN on the failed attempt to subpoena INEC and the office of the INEC to produce certain documents despite efforts of the bailiff of the court.
“He asked for a copy of the subpoena which I couldn’t produce at that time, but he suggested I give to any member of the team in court .
“I am confident we will do the needful and we will continue tomorrow.
Responding, Counsel to INEC, Kemi Pinhero, SAN, told the court that the petitioner’s counsel should stop using INEC as ‘a weeping boy.’
“It is not correct that the office of the INEC chairman refused to be served, but PDP served several documents and received replies,” she said.
He added that it has become the habit of the petitioners each time they want an adjournment to find a blame on INEC.
“It has become a habit, whenever they want an adjournment, they will look for someone to whip. I have no privy that he had any discussion with AB Mahmoud.
“We have no ideal of subpoena served and the refusal. PDP served us, we received and file our reply.
“Everytime the matter came up, they keep saying INEC is refusing a document.
“If they want an adjournment, they should ask for it and we will not be objecting. The reason on not accepting or refusing service is absolutely not correct. It is very uncharitable,” INEC defended.
Other respondents’ counsel however, did not object to the prayer for adjournment.
Meanwhile, the five-man panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani adjourned until tomorrow (Thursday) for further hearing of the petition.
The Presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP), Mr Peter Gregory Obi tendered additional 188 exhibits to substantiate allegations of malpractices in the conduct of the February 25 presidential election.
The exhibits, mainly results sheets and reports used by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) during the election were tendered at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) and admitted as exhibits to be used to determine the legality or otherwise of Tinubu’s return as the President.
Obi, through Mr Peter Afoba, SAN tendered forms EC40GPU, EC40G1 and reports prepared by the electoral body after the election.
Forms EC40GPU are INEC forms used for entering complaints from electoral officials.
The breakdown showed that 45 EC40GPU forms were tendered in 10 Local Government Areas of Niger State, 23 in seven Local Government Areas of Osun, 17 in three Local Government Areas of Edo State, and 52 EC40GPU forms in five Local Government Areas of Sokoto were tendered.
Obi also tendered 15 forms EC40G in 8 Local Government Areas of Osun State, 12 forms EC40G1 in 12 Local Government Areas of Edo, 15 forms EC40G in four Local Government Areas of Sokoto and 9 forms EC40G1 in two Local Government Areas of Sokoto.
Besides, the Labour Party’s presidential candidate also tendered 5 Reports on the conduct of the election in Niger State and 8 in Edo to back up his allegations of malpractices during the conduct of the election.
Notwithstanding the objections to the admissibility of the evidence from the Respondents, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani admitted them as exhibits.
Also, Obi tendered INEC Results Viewing (IRev) reports in 21 Local Government Areas of Adamawa State, 20 in Ogun State, 16 in Ekiti State, 19 in Rivers State, and 25 Akwa Ibom State.
Meanwhile, the Court has shifted further hearing in the petition to June 14.