On March 3, 2025, parties will be able to adopt their respective written speeches in the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which is located in Abuja.
This came after the All Progressives Congress (APC) abruptly ended its defense last week after only four witnesses were called to support its win in the Edo State gubernatorial election on September 21, 2024.
Last Thursday’s closure was unexpected because the APC, the third respondent in the petition filed by the PDP and its candidate, Mr. Asue Ighodalo, had only called four witnesses to testify about the governorship elections.
The three-member panel led by Justice Wilfred Kpochi had last Wednesday adjourned trial the following day (Thursday) to enable the APC to tender some documents which it claimed the remaining witnesses would rely on in giving their evidence.
In order to support its triumph, the APC also informed the court that it would summon 28 witnesses. After calling four witnesses, it unexpectedly requested an adjournment so that it could call the remaining witnesses, who would rely on documents that had not yet been submitted to the tribunal.
Chief Ferdinand Orbih (SAN), who defended the APC’s position, told the court last Thursday that the third respondent was still awaiting documents from Benin City that its witnesses would use as evidence. However, he declared that they would be closing the matter because they were unable to defend any further.
The reason for this, he claimed, was that the numerous papers that were tendered, the petitioners’ testimony during the respondents’ cross-examination, and the testimony of the third respondent had adequately supported their case, negating the need for more witnesses.
“Taking all the enumerated factors into consideration, we are happy at this stage to close the 3rd respondent’s case, with the leave of my Lordships”, Orbih submitted.
Justice Kpochi granted the motion in a brief order because the petitioners did not object, and March 3 was set aside for the parties to adopt their final written addresses in the case. Although the panel allowed the respondents seven days to file and serve their defense, it mandated that the petitioners react within five days of receiving the processes.
Additionally, the panel stated that the respondents have three days to respond to the legal argument. Okpebholo of the APC was proclaimed the winner of the Edo State election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) after he received 291,667 votes, defeating his close challenger, Asue Ighodalo of the PDP, who received 247,655 votes.
Disappointed with the results of the election, the PDP and its candidate went to the tribunal, pleading with it to overturn INEC’s announcement that the APC and Okpebholo had won the contest.
Among other reasons, the petitioners argued that the governorship election was void due to purported violations of the Electoral Act.
In the appeal with the number EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, they also contended that Governor Okpebholo of the APC did not receive the most legitimate votes cast during the election. In order to demonstrate that there was, in fact, excessive voting and incorrect vote counting in more than 700 polling places during the election, the petitioners called 19 witnesses. Before ending their case, they also submitted more than a thousand documents to the tribunal to demonstrate that Ighodalo had actually won the election.
The first respondent, the electoral umpire, did not call any witnesses when INEC was invited to defend their activities during the poll. It only tendered 153 of the Bimodal Verification Accreditation System (BVAS) used in 133 polling units where results are disputed.
While the APC, which had previously claimed to have 28 witnesses, unexpectedly called four before wrapping up its case, the second respondent, Senator Okpebholo, only summoned one.
During the petitioners’ attorneys’ cross-examinations, there were inconsistencies even among the four. For example, Theophilus Afuda, the APC’s Collation Agent for Esan North East LGA, first testified in his witness testimony that there were no instances of over-voting in the race for governor.
However, Afuda changed his mind during cross-examination by Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN), the PDP’s attorney, and acknowledged that instances of excessive voting and a failure to serialize election materials were visible in important evidence, such as Form EC25B and certified copies of result sheets.
The PDP claims that the results in the impacted polling places are invalid because INEC neglected to record the serial numbers of ballot papers, result sheets, and other sensitive election materials in the necessary forms, which he further affirmed.
Under cross-examination, another APC witness, Engr. Gabriel Iduseri, who was the party’s collation agent for Oredo LGA, also admitted that the polling unit results posted on the iREV portal did not match the final figures INEC used to proclaim Okpebholo the victor.
He also acknowledged that although collation agents had to confirm results before entering them into Form EC8C, they did not have party agent signatures and did not match the signed original EC8A results from polling units that were uploaded to iREV.
This was the case when they were shown the polling unit results used to compile the final figures that INEC had announced.
“These results are strange, my Lord. I do not know where they emanated from,” Engr. Iduseri confessed.
Similarly, during cross-examination, Frank David, the party’s witness from Owan West LGA, admitted that INEC presiding officers were supposed to record the serial numbers of sensitive electoral materials, like ballot papers and result sheets, in Form EC25B prior to the start of voting, but they didn’t.
The people of the state are hoping for justice, fairness, impartiality, and independence as the tribunal, which moved to Abuja a few weeks ago because of violent happenings in Edo, gets ready to render a decision.
Everyone is eager to see how the panel will bravely administer justice in this case given what has happened thus far in the hearings and the volume of evidence presented, including witness oral testimony.
