It Is Postponement Of Evil Day - Counsel Opens Up To Chris Ekpeyong ... As Hafizu's Judgment Exposes Compromise, Conspiracy Against Akpabio
By UbongAbasi Ise
Wednesday night was a moment of mix-feelings for the camps of Senator Godswill Akpabio and Senator Chris Ekpenyong following the rulings of the national assembly election petitions sitting in Uyo, the Akwa Ibom State capital.
The respondents to the petition, including their supporters, were thrown into excitement as the majority decision of the panel read by Justice W. O. Akanbi upheld the election of Senator Chris Ekpenyong of the Peoples' Democratic Party, PDP, though the minority judgment by Justice Sherrif Hafizu was apparently giving them something to worry about.
On the other hand, the mood of Senator Akpabio's supporters was enlivened by Justice Hafizu split decision as he pointed to numbers of evidences to declare that the petitioner merits the victory of the February 23 senatorial election in Akwa Ibom Northwest District.
Interacting with newsmen shortly after the rulings, the petitioner's counsel, Adekunle Oyesanya, SAN, said the petition has a potent ground in the event of his client approaching the appellate court because the minority decision represents the position of the law and carries with it sufficient evidences to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Senator Akpabio won the majority of votes in the election.
Oyesanya said the majority decision of the tribunal would only delay justice as it would not stand at the Court of Appeal, saying it is merely the postponement of the evil day for the respondents.
Justice Sheriff Hafizu, in his dissenting judgment, had said the collated votes for Senator Godswill Akpabio of the All Progressives Congress, APC, showed he clearly won the election but majority of his votes were surreptitiously and unilaterally cancelled by an official of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, in a bid to hand over victory to Senator Ekpenyong.
Hafizu said it was wrong not to have announced the Essien Udim result at the local government collation centre as it is required by the electoral act to make announcement of polling unit result at the polling unit, ward result at ward collation center, local government result at local government collation centre and so on.
He said the cancellation of votes at INEC headquarters in Uyo in the absence of the presiding officers and the polling unit party agents amounts to serious violation of the electoral guidelines.
According to him, the case of Senator Akpabio centred on cancellation of duly collated votes at INEC office which went far beyond the units. While challenging the position of the Respondents that Senator Akpabio ought to have called polling unit agents to prove his case, he said such was wrong since Akpabio had not challenged the results of the units, hence there was nothing to prove.
Citing the case of Dr. William Olosunde, the Essien Udim returning officer, who had admitted on cross-examination that Senator Akpabio's votes were altered at INEC office in Uyo on the instructions of Akwa Ibom Resident Electoral Commissioner, Mr Mike Igini, the minority judge has it that such alterations were unlawful.
He described the cancellation of APC's 61,329 votes in Essien Udim local government area against PDP's 9,050 at INEC state headquarters as a clear case of robbery since it did not follow the due process of INEC guidelines.
On Obot Akara result, Justice Hafizu said it was wrong to revalidate the cancelled result in Uyo since it was obvious that the Returning Officer cancelled the votes of Obot Akara due to an established case of over voting.
While nullifying the election of Senator Chris Ekpenyong, Justice Sherrif Hafizu declared Senator Akpabio as the winner of the February 23 senatorial election having scored the majority of the lawful votes and ordered the Independent INEC to present a certificate of return to Senator Akpabio as the duly elected Senator of Akwa Ibom North West Senatorial District.
Meanwhile the majority ruling by Justice W.O. Akanbi and Justice Ebetu held that the burden of evidence for proving substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Act to ground a nullification of the election is on the petitioner and relying on the case of ANDREW v. INEC, the court thereupon held that the Petitioner's evidence was too weak in all ramifications to prove non-compliance, not to mention substantial non-compliance, which is the only ground for nullification of the elections.
The court further stated that the petition failed to bring any witness from the polling units and thus could not prove substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Act.
Consequently, the two justices dismissed the petition and upheld as valid the declaration of Senator Christopher Ekpenyong as the winner of the February 23, 2019 elections.
©The Sensor Newspaper
Comments
Post a Comment