The appeal submitted by the state’s former governor, Gboyega Oyetola, challenging Senator Ademola Adeleke’s win in the July 16 governorship election was delayed by the Osun State Election Petitions Tribunal on Friday.
Justice Tertsea Kume, the chairman of the three-person panel, postponed communication of the verdict to the parties until the petitioner and respondents had adopted their final written addresses in Osogbo, the state capital.
On August 5, Oyetola and the All Progressives Congress filed a petition with the tribunal in Osogbo.
See What Secondus Said After INEC Declared Adeleke Winner
Oyetola and the APC contested the results of the election from 749 polling places spread throughout 10 local government areas of the state due to several purported electoral irregularities, most notably over-voting.
With 403, 271 votes to Oyetola’s 375,027, the Independent National Electoral Commission pronounced Adeleke the victor of the governorship race.
In an earlier written speech, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), counsel for the APC, stated that all paperwork was filed and delivered on January 8.
Fagbemi adopted all written submissions, including objections on legal grounds, and he also disputed all prior objections made by the respondents, pleading with the court to grant all of his requests and submissions.
Sections 51 (2) and 47(2) of the Electoral Act, which deal with the annulment of polling places where there are more votes cast than there are registered and authorized voters, were mentioned by Fagbemi.
Osun 2022: Why I’m Yet To Congratulate Adeleke – Oyetola
Additionally, the testimony provided by Governor Adeleke, according to Mr. Akin Olujimi, SAN, counsel for Oyetola, did not demonstrate that he attended Muslim Grammar School in Ede.
Olujimi rejected the respondents’ assertion that Governor Adeleke was qualified to run for office, and he said that the testimonial Adeleke provided was falsified because it was obtained in 1988 from Osun State, despite the fact that Osun was just founded in 1991.
He claims that the response ought to have argued that the error was a typographical one, but they never did.
All of the documents submitted by the respondent’s attorney, according to Olujimi, were unrelated to one another and without any probative value.
Prof. Paul Ananaba, SAN, the attorney for INEC, submitted his own arguments and offered the court his final written addresses dated December 30, 2022, which were also filed on that date, along with legal arguments in response, which were filed on January 9 and January 11, respectively.
Court Dismisses Lawsuit Aiming To Invalidate Adeleke’s Candidacy
Ananaba claimed that INEC was required to certify that the respondent, Adeleke, was eligible to run for governor, which they did. He then adopted all of the presented documents as his final written statement.
He said, “the petitioners complained of over-voting and infractions by picking 749 polling units to contend with from 1750 polling units, according to the first respondent witnessed (RW1).
“If the deduction of 1750 units was carried out from the total 3763 units in the state, the second respondent will still emerge as the winner with over 20,000 votes.”
Gov. Ademola Adeleke’s attorney, Mr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, adopted all of the submitted documents as his client’s last written address and urged the tribunal to deny the petitioner’s request.
Ikpeazu claimed that the Court of Appeal had addressed the contention about Adeleke’s credentials and right to run for governor.
Regarding the over-voting claim, Ikpeazu testified before the court that BVAS machines were used to create certified true copies of accreditation documents and that BVAS was the main source of accreditation.
See What Secondus Said After INEC Declared Adeleke Winner
He added that extraction from the BVAS computers was distinct from extraction from the INEC database.
Ikpeazu said that despite having signed the results as valid, the petitioners’ agents did not challenge any polling unit results on election day.
” The entries in form EC8A tallied with figures on the forms as being contended by the petitioners.
“You can not determine over-voting proper without the application of the BVAS machines,” he said.
The PDP’s legal counsel, Mr. Alex Iziyon, SAN, also accepted all written materials filed and provided on legal points.
Iziyon claimed that the Court of Appeal’s decision had resolved the petitioners’ claim of certificate forgery, making it irrelevant.
Follow us on Facebook
Post Disclaimer
The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the author and forum participants on this website do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of Anaedo Online or official policies of the Anaedo Online.