Ighodalo heads to Supreme Court as Appeal Court affirms Okpebholo as Edo governor

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has affirmed Mr. Monday Okpebholo as duly elected governor in the Sept. 21, 2024 governorship election  held in Edo.

The court, in a judgement by a three-member panel led by Justice M. A. Danjuma, dismissed an appeal filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Asue Ighodalo, to challenge the election outcome.

The appellate court held that it found no reason to dislodge the May 15 judgement of the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which validated the declaration of Gov. Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as winner of the poll.

However, Ighodalo has vowed to appeal the judgement at the Supreme Court.

Justice Wilfred Kpochi-led three-member panel had dismissed the petitions by the PDP and its candidate; the Action Alliance (AA) and its National Chairman, Adekunle Rufai Omoaje; as well as a case that was brought before it by the Accord Party (AP) and its own candidate, Dr. Bright Enabulele.

The tribunal described the petitions as “lacking in merit.” 

The tribunal held that it found no reason to nullify the outcome of the governorship election declared in favour of the APC and its candidate, Okpebholo.

The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, had declared that Okpebholo of the APC secured a total of 291, 667 votes to defeat his closet rivalry, Ighodalo of the PDP, who got a total of 247, 655 votes.

Dissatisfied with the result, the petitioners approached the tribunal, alleging that the election was not conducted in substantial compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.

In the petition marked: EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, PDP and its candidate alleged that governor Okpebholo did not secure the highest number of lawful votes that were cast at the election.

It was equally the contention of the petitioners that INEC failed to serialise and pre-record some of the sensitive materials that were dCourt to deliver ruling on admissibility of FG’s evidence against Nnamdi Kanu

The Federal High Court in Abuja stood down proceedings to deliver ruling on the admissibility of the evidence sought to be tendered by the Federal Government in the ongoing trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).
Justice James Omotosho stood down the matter after FG’s counsel, Suraj Saida, SAN, and Kanu’s lawyer, Paul Erokoro, SAN, adopted their written addresses and argued their case for and against the propriety of the evidence.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN).reports that Justice Omotosho, on Wednesday, ordered a trial-within-trial  following Kanu’s rejection of the extra-judicial statements sought to be tendered by the prosecution.
The IPOB leader had alleged that the statements were made by him under duress.
Kanu alleged that DSS officials, who interrogated him, denied him access to his lawyer, threatened not to allow him on bail and deny him the one hour granted him daily to receive fresh air in view of his health challenge.
He said he was threatened by a DSS investigator, who he described as Mr Brown Ukuaba, an Assistant Director, of Investigation.
He also alleged that his interrogators asked him to say things about ex-President Jonathan and former Gov. Rochas Okorocha of Imo, which were not his words.
He said he was kept in an underground cell and in solitary confinement.
He claimed that the video recordings played in court were edited.
The FG’s witness, a DSS operative, however debunked the allegations, saying they were untrue.
The witness insisted that Kanu was never subjected to coercion and that all the complaints he raised were addressed.
He denied that Kanu was subjected to any form of duress or coercion.
The witness faulted Kanu’s claim that he was kept in solitary confinement in an underground cell and that he suffered from any ill-treatment.
He said Kanu was given preferential treatment and served bottled water during the interview sessions.
The witness said he was surprised to hear the allegations made by the defendant.
He also denied that anyone asked Kanu to say things about Jonathan and Okorocha, adding that Kanu “spoke voluntarily and truthfully in the interviews.”
Justice Omotosho then ordered the conduct of a trial-within-trial to ascertain the voluntariness or otherwise of Kanu’s statements.

Details later ployed for the poll, a situation they said aided the rigging of the election in favour of the APC and its candidate.

Specifically, PDP and its candidate alleged that there was wrong computation of results in 765 polling units in the state, even as they produced 19 witnesses that testified and tendered exhibits before the tribunal

Details later …