Edo guber: Legal fireworks begin at Election Petition Tribunal

Thursday, November 24, 2016 8:07 pm

The All Progressives Congress (APC), Governor Godwin Obaseki and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), have filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the Edo State Election Petition Tribunal to entertain the petitions of the candidate of the Young Democratic Party, Nurudeen Inwanfero over the non-inclusion of the party’s logo on the ballot papers used for the conduct of the September 28 Edo State governorship election.

At Thursday’s sitting, Counsel to the Young Democratic Party and its candidate, Ugo Nwofor, attempted to withdraw one of the petitions‎ but he was opposed by Counsel to APC, Lateef Fagbemi, on the ground that the law prescribed methods and procedures for withdrawal of petition.

After entertaining arguments from the parties, Chairman of the three-man Election Petition Tribunal, Justice A.T. Badamasi, adjourned the matter to December 2, 2016, for hearing and defending of the application of withdrawal and other related matters.

Counsel to the Young Democratic Party candidate, Ugo Nwofor, who spoke to journalists at the premises of the Tribunal, said APC, INEC and Governor Godwin Obaseki challenged the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the petition because of its two petitions before it.

“They are challenging the jurisdiction of the Court based on the fact that we have two petitions and that is why they don’t want us to withdraw one. They said the Court is not competent because we have two petitions.

“The crux of our petition is that we were excluded from the election and we pray the court for outright cancellation of the election,” he said.

Nwofor who is also the National Legal Adviser of the party,explained further that “on 19th of October when we filed this application, there were two petitions pending. We have petitions number one and three, and we filed notice of discontinuance for petition number one and now we want to withdraw petition number one.

He said the petition was withdrawn because of some typographical errors, pointing out that the petitioner was at liberty to file as many petitions and withdraw any one he wants to discontinue with.

He explained that the contents of petition number one and three were the same, adding that petition number three was with little amendments.

“Petition number one is the same content with petition number three, but with little amendments, and before it was served, we filed a notice of discontinuance and that is why APC, Obaseki and INEC are now battling that they want both petitions.

“We don’t want to file petition number one and they said we must file it. Must you force me to file petition one? I don’t want to file petition number one and in fact it has been tactically withdrawn but they are saying that we must file petition one and three. It is unheard of,” he said.

On his part, Counsel to APC, Lateef Fagbemi, contended that the prescribed procedures must be followed before the petition can be withdrawn and discontinued.

“In discontinuing an action, the laws prescribe what methods or procedures to be followed. Until we get to that bridge we can’t say anything, but when we get to the bridge we will cross it.

“It is enough that we have not been served with any hearing notice fixing the matter for today in respect of the petition in which the petitioner said he has withdrawn.

“Whether the action has been properly withdrawn or not will be discussed at the next date of adjournment and certain penalties or consequences follows,” he explained.