Tribunal admits more exhibits against Amosun as Isiaka, PDP call final witness
Not minding stiff opposition from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Governor Ibikunle Amosun of Ogun State State, the State Tribunal sitting in Abeokuta, the state capital on Saturday granted an application seeking to tender more exhibits.
Ogun State Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate Prince Gboyega Nasir Isiaka had approached the tribunal challenging the victory of Amosun which they said was fraught with irregularities and non-compliance with electoral laws. The Petitioners wanted elections in 9 local councils cancelled and declared Isiaka the winner of the election.
The applications, dated 18th August, 2015 was brought pursuant to section 151 of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended) and paragraphs 41 (8), 45 (4)(5) of First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2010.
Among other prayers, the application sought an order granting leave to the Petitioners to file and use as evidence to maintain the Petition, the Sworn Witness Statement of last witness, Benjamin Ibikunle and Report of Inspection of election materials carried out on the order of the Tribunal.
Opposing the application, Counsels to the 1st – 3rd Respondents, Dr Olumide Ayeni, George Oyeniyi and Oluwajare Ogunnaike respectively said the witness was not listed amongst the witnesses to be called and that allowing the application would amount to amending the substantive petition through the back door.
In his reply, Counsel to the petitioners Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN) said the Tribunal would be over ruling itself since it was the same court which granted the order of the inspection.
Sighting Omidiran vs Etteh, 2011 and Aregbesola vs Oyinlola, 20019, Oyeyipo also submitted that the evidence and facts obtained in the course of the inspection were necessary to be brought before the court to maintain the substantive petition.
While granting the application, Chairman of the three man panel, Justice Henry Olusiyi maintained that the Tribunal was satisfied with all facts put before it by the Petitioners adding that the case of amending the petition does not arise.
He ruled, “We have considered all the authorities and we entirely agreed with the submission of the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners/Applicant.
“The loan issue for determination formulated by us is resolved in the affirmative in favour of the Petitioners/Applicant. In the final analysis, we found considerable merit in the application, it succeeds and its hereby granted.
Consequent upon the ruling, the Petitioners Witness (PW9) was admitted on oath and moved to tender a Press Statement issued by the Secretary to INEC and dated 2nd April, 2015 but was also vehemently opposed by the Respondents.
Sighting Kubor vs Dickson, 2013, Oyeniyi and Ogunnaike argued that the document did not comply with section 84 (2) of Evidence Act because it was a Computer Generated Evidence.
But Oyeyipo in his submission maintained that the objection suffered from mere assumption that the document was a Computer Generated Evidence.
He added that, on the face of the document, there was a signature of the 3rd Respondent and that the Respondents did not make any attempt to substantiate the ‘blank statement’ from the bar.
The tribunal subsequently admitted the press statement in evidence and marked same as exhibit P4272.
The court also admitted offloaded data from card readers used for the election in the nine local governments under contention as marked same as exhibit P4273.
The manual used for the election was also admitted in evidence and marked exhibit P4272 while the tendering of ballot papers as exhibit failed as the Tribunal ruled PW9 incompetent to tender original document.
The witness was also invited to identify all the exhibits already admitted in evidence and cross examined by the Lead Counsel to the Amosun, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN).
The report of the inspection of election materials viz: Results sheets (forms EC8A, EC8B, EC8C and EC8D), Incident Forms and Voter Registers for the 9 disputed LGAs which was carried out on the order of the tribunal by the Petitioner was admitted in evidence.
But by 10.30pm the atmosphere in the court premises was getting tensed as some suspected party thugs not happy with the proceeding arrived at the court which caused panic and forced many to leave the court in fear.
The court, however adjourned till Tuesday for continuation of hearing especially continuation of cross examination by other Respondents.
