The National and State Assembly Election Petition Tribunal in Kogi on Wednesday reserved judgment in a petition filed by Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against Abubakar Sadiku-Ohere of the All Progressive Congress (APC).
When the case came up for adoption of written addresses before the tribunal led by Justice K.A. Ojiako, Counsel to Sadiku-Ohere, APC and INEC, Messers M.Y. Abdullahi (SAN), S.A. Abbas and Dayo Akinlaja (SAN) as 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents respectively, prayed the tribunal to dismiss her petition for lacking in merit.
Akinlaja argued in his final written address that the petitioners in paragraphs 31 – 44 of their petition could not give concrete evidence as to their claims and therefore, had only embarked on mere academic exercise.
Also, Abdullahi, in his written address alleged that no witness gave evidence to the claims of the petitioners, which means that they (petitioners) only dumped documents on the tribunal without activating them.
“We pray that those paragraphs in which the petitioners couldn’t activate should be expunged and the petition be dismissed for want of evidence, ” the counsel pleaded.
But the counsel to Akpoti-Uduaghan, Umeh Kalu (SAN) and Johnson Usman (SAN) in adopting their written address debunked the claims of INEC and Sadiku-Ohere, and prayed the court to disregard their submissions and prayers and allow the petition.
Usman, who spoke, said their address was explicit about their disagreement with the issues raised by the INEC and Sadiku-Ohere in their written addresses.
“INEC is the conductor of the election and didn’t deny all the wrongs on the day of the election even as we cited authorities to prove that.
“Again, 1st and 3rd respondents alleged we failed to activate our statements. What about Prosecution witnesses (PWs) from the 2nd to 18th, who were eyewitnesses of all that happened at the polling units that came here and testified?
“Therefore, there is no other evidence that overshadowed those of PW2 – PW18. What’s even more concrete, is that PW20 is an INEC official, that gave evidence in this case.
“What’s more? We tendered three results at different occasions and all these results from the same origin and in contents and are clear as to our client’s victory and to mean that this petition stands unchallenged.
“If we just go by the results tendered, and pick only one in which reads 751 votes that were suppressed, Akpoti-Uduaghan is a clear winner of that election.
“This is because they claimed Sadiku-Ohere won with only 369 votes. Therefore, if the 751 votes are added to Akpoti-Uduaghan’s, that one alone settles the matter to declare her as the winner of that election, ” Usman argued.
The lead judge, Justice Ojiako, after hearing from all the counsels as they adopt their written addresses with adombrations, declared that the judgement has been reserved to a date to be communicated to all the parties involved.
