By; OLADELE ADEDAYO, Ado-Ekiti
The Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Ado-Ekiti, the Ekiti State capital on Thursday, upheld the election of Governor Biodun Oyebanji and his Deputy, Mrs. Monisade Afuye.
The Ekiti State Governorship Election, it would be recalled, was held on June 18, 2022.
The Tribunal in a judgment, however, dismissed the petition filed by former governor and the Social Democratic Party (SDP) governorship candidate, Chief Segun Oni, resolving all issues in favour of the defendants.
Oni, who was dissatisfied with the declaration of Oyebanji, who contested on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC) by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), filed a petition against the result declared by the electoral umpire in the early hours of June 19.
In the unanimous judgment read by the Chairman of the Tribunal, Justice Wilfred Kpochi with the concurrence of the two other members of the panel, Justice Sa’ad Zadawa and Justice J.A. Atsen, the panel held that “head or tail, the petitioners (Oni and SDP) have failed woefully” to convince the jury to nullify the election that brought Oyebanji to power.
The Tribunal ruled that Oni himself, in his evidence, admitted and agreed that Oyebanji and Afuye were validly nominated and sponsored by their party, hence it cannot set aside their nomination and candidacy as confirmed by his testimony and evidence before it.
The panel had earlier ruled on some motions upon which verdict was pending, before determining the merit of the petition holding that the Petitioners have failed to prove the allegations that Oyebanji and Afuye were not qualified to run for the offices of the Governor and the Deputy Governor respectively.
Respondents in the petition are Oyebanji (1st), APC (2nd), Yobe State Governor, Alhaji Mai Mala Buni in his capacity as the National Chairman of the APC Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (3rd), INEC (4th) and Afuye (5th).
Oni’s petition was based on whether Oyebanji and Afuye were qualified to have contested at the polls; whether they were validly nominated by their party, the APC; whether Mala Buni had the authority to sign their nomination papers and forward same to INEC; whether Afuye possessed the right academic certificates to run for Deputy Governor alleging that they were forged and whether the election was not vitiated by corrupt practices.
The panel ruled against the challenge of the Petitioners (Oni and the SDP) against the January 27 APC primary that produced Oyebanji holding the the Governor and his Deputy were duly and validly nominated by their party (APC) to contest in the June 18 main governorship election.
According to the Tribunal, Oni’s averment that the Ekiti APC governorship primary election which produced Oyebanji as the flag bearer was superintended over by the National Caretaker Executive Committee under the leadership of Buni does not hold water as the votes which gave him the mandate were cast by party members and not Mala Buni.
Ruling on Oni’s position that Mala Buni and the then Secretary of APC CECPC, Dr. John Akpanudoedehe signing the nomination papers of Oyebanji and Afuye, invalidated their nomination as governorship and deputy governorship candidates respectively, the Tribunal described the petitioner’s objection as “lame.”
The Tribunal held that the issue of Buni’s signing of letter of the party’s sponsorship of Oyebanji to INEC in his capacity as the National Chairman of APC CECPC while holding office as Yobe State Governor had been decided by the nation’s highest court, the Supreme Court.
The Panel ruled that Supreme Court had held in the case of Eyitayo Jegede v INEC describing such an issue as an internal affairs of the party and further held that it is not within the jurisdiction of the Election Petition Tribunal.
The Tribunal held that in deference to the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court, Mala Buni in his capacity as Yobe State Governor cannot be sued as he enjoys constitutional immunity in line with Section 308 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999
The Tribunal said it lacks the propriety to inquire into the role played by Mala Buni in the internal affairs of his party moreso when the case had been settled by both the Supreme Court in the Eyitayo Jegede case and the Court of Appeal in the Gboyega Oyetola case which was decided recently.
The Tribunal ruled: “It was the party members who voted at the primary and not the person that signed the nomination papers. The 3rd Respondent (Mala Buni) merely co-signed the letter and formally informed the 4th Respondent (INEC).
“The decision is that of the 2nd Respondent (APC) and not that of the 3rd Respondent (Mala Buni) and the matter has been decided by the Supreme Court. The decision to nominate candidates is jointly carried out by the congress of the party, voting is done by members.
“The decision is not taken by the National Executive Committee of the political party. The National Executive of the party submitted the names (of the candidates) to the 4th Respondent (INEC), it was a notice to the 4th Respondent, an official communication to the 4th Respondent.
“That issue has been settled by the Supreme Court and we shall be swimming against the tide of the decision of the superior court if we resolve the issue in favour of the Petitioners.”
Ruling on Oni’s allegation of certificate forgery levelled against Afuye which the Petitioners claimed had disqualified her from running, the Tribunal held that “the Petitioners have a duty to prove that the 5th Respondent (Afuye) does not have valid certificates to stand as deputy governorship candidate.
The Tribunal held that the Petitioners attempted to invoke the issue of forgery as an afterthought and the prayer is invalid by the fact that it was introduced against the 5th Respondent in the Petitioners’ additional statement on oath and not contained in the main petition filed.
The Panel noted that the allegation of forgery was raised against Afuye state by Mr Dada Moses Bamidele Petitioners Witness 2 (PW2) and the 1st Petitioner, Oni, who was PW3 after the window for filing of the petition had closed and it cannot be smuggled in with the filing of the additional witness on oath in reply to the Respondents witness on oath.
The Tribunal ruled that by doing so, the Petitioners had acted in breach of Paragraph 11A of their Petition that forbade them from introducing a new matter after the window to do so had lapsed when their petition was filed adding that such an allegation must be proved beyond the reasonable doubt.
The Tribunal ruled that the Petitioners did an incalculable damage to their case by failing to call the examination body, the West African Examinations Council (WAEC) to give evidence and prove that school certificate of the Deputy Governor was forged adding that evidence given by Bamidele and Oni were hearsay.
“The allegation (against the Deputy Governor) must be proved beyond the reasonable doubt. The next issue for the Petitioners was to have called WAEC to give evidence hence the evidence of PW2 and PW3 (Bamidele and Oni) will be hearsay even if not swept away by our ruling in an earlier motion. They testified that they had never worked with WAEC,” the Tribunal held.
The Tribunal further ruled that the 1st and the 5th Respondents were qualified to run for the offices of the Governor and the Deputy Governor respectively and the testimony of Oni that they were not qualified holds no water as the SDP candidate had admitted while being cross-examined by counsel to the Respondents that the duo (Oyebanji and Afuye) were validly nominated by their political party (the APC).
The Tribunal held that having admitted while giving evidence that Oyebanji and Afuye were validly nominated, Oni’s testimony was “inconsistent and self-defeating” with his prayer in his additional statement on oath before the Tribunal that they were not qualified to run.
“The evidence of PW3 (Oni) that he was sponsored by the SDP and that the 1st and the 5th Respondents were sponsored by the APC has sounded a death knell on the petition of the 1st Petitioner (Oni),” the Tribunal held in part.
The Tribunal also dismissed the allegation of corrupt practices across the places where election was held in the election levelled by Oni holding that “it is incumbent on him (Oni) to prove same beyond the reasonable doubt as the allegation was criminal in nature.”
Besides, the Panel held that Oni and the SDP failed to call witnesses from the units, wards and local government areas where such alleged corrupt practices to give evidence to prove the alleged corrupt practices maintaining that “such must be proved unit-by-unit, ward-by-ward.”
The Tribunal held that since the Petitioners have failed to provide any evidence to disqualify the 1st and the 5th Respondents, they were qualified to contest in the June 18 governorship election and the votes recorded for them and the results declared by the 4th Respondent (INEC) are valid.
The Tribunal further ruled that INEC conducted a free and fair election which was in compliance with the Election Act (as amended) and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 hence it has resolved all issues in favour of the Respondents.
“Head or tail, the Petitioners have woefully failed to convince us to resolve all issues in their favour. We confirmed that the election that returned the 1st and 5th Respondents as Governor and Deputy Governor was conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“The Petition is hereby dismissed,” said Justice Zadawa who read the latter part of the judgment.
In the result declared by INEC, Oyebanji of the APC polled 187,057 votes to defeat Oni of the SDP who scored 82,211 while the candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Bisi Kolawole came third with 57,457 votes in an election that was contested by 16 candidates.
