Advertisement

Governor Peter Mbah of Enugu State and his challenger in the March 18, 2022 governorship election in the state, Chijioke Edeoga of the Labour Party will have to wait before knowing their fates, as the state’s Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal, on Wednesday, reserved its judgment.

The tribunal, led by Justice Akano, reserved judgment after the parties to the petition adopted their final written addresses, adding that the date of the judgment will be communicated to the parties.

Advertisement

The candidate of the Labour Party, Edeoga, approached the tribunal to challenge the declaration of Peter Mbah of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), as the validly elected governor of Enugu State by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

INEC is the first respondent in the petition, and Dr Mbah and PDP are listed as the second and third respondents respectively.

Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, the lead counsel to Labour Party and Edeoga, however asked the tribunal to uphold the position of his clients and grant the reliefs sought by his client.

Advertisement

According to him, it has been established beyond any reasonable doubt that Mr Peter Mbah was at the time of the election not constitutionally qualified to contest for the election having presented a forged certificate of national service to INEC.

Awomolo also highlighted the issues of over-voting, non-use of BVAS, and alleged forgery of NYSC certificate, among others brought by the petitioner as reasons why the matter should be decided in favour of his client (Edeoga).

Meanwhile, Edeoga’s counsel had earlier prayed the tribunal to allow him amend a section of his address where he asked the court to declare him Governor of Rivers state in the place of Enugu state.

However, adopting his address, counsel to INEC, Mr Abdul Mohammed, urged the tribunal to dismiss Edeoga’s petition with substantial cost.

Advertisement

Mohammed argued that the so-called letter written by the NYSC disclaiming Mbah’s NYSC certificate should not be regarded.

While adopting his address, Peter Mbah’s counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun, (SAN), prayed the tribunal to dismiss the Petitions of the Labour Party for lacking in merit and a mere academic exercise.

“They have not presented any proof. The petitioner’s witnesses, who came to testify in court were agents without identities, PW 6,7,9,10,11,12,13,22 and 28 admitted that there was no over voting,” he said.

Advertisement

In his own submission, the counsel to the Peoples Democratic Party, Anthony Ani (SAN), contended that the argument of the petitioners is vague and lacking in evidence.

The counsel to the third respondent, Mr Alex Izinyon told the court to dismiss the petition in its entirety as it was a shadow chasing.

Izinyon said that the evidence required in the polling units was not agents’ evidence, adding that they derailed from their pleading as there was no evidence of forgery in the certificate before the court.

Earlier, the three respondents opposed the application for correction of the petitioners’ written final address, saying that they had already adopted their own final addresses.

Mohammed opposed the application vehemently, saying that the correction was an amendment to add a further address.

Justice Akano said that the ruling on the application for the correction of the petitioner’s final written address would come alongside the judgement.

Ripples/Daily Post/Pacesetter