Kogi Guber: Ajaka, Ododo Know Fate as Appeal Court Reserves Judgement

Alex Enumah in Abuja

In a few days from now the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal, will deliver its judgement in the appeal filed by candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in the November 11, 2023, governorship election, Muritala Ajaka and his party against the election of Governor Usman Ododo.

A three-member panel of the appellate court on Thursday announced that judgement is reserved in the appeal seeking to unseat Ododo as governor.

The panel stated that the date for its judgement in the appeal would be communicated to parties shortly after parties adopted their written addresses for and against the appeal.

Recall that the Kogi State Election Petition Tribunal had on May 27, affirmed Ododo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the duly elected governor of Kogi state.

At Thursday’s proceedings, counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, while adopting his written address, prayed the court to dismiss Ajaka’s appeal for lacking in merit.

He said there were inconsistencies in the case of the appellants.
He argued that the appeal court had decided that if the grounds of a petition were inconsistent with one another, and were not consistent with the reliefs, it should be struck out.

He also argued that the evidence of the petitioners were grossly insufficient, citing a Supreme Court decision.

The senior lawyer argued that once the evidence called is grossly insufficient, there is no evidence.

He said the petitioners only called 25 witnesses out of the scores listed.
He further argued that out of the 25 witnesses called by the petitioners, there was no single polling unit agent among them.

Agabi also argued that the PW1 did not file any witness deposition before hand as required by law and as such cannot give evidence in an election petition.

Joseph Daudu (SAN), in his own submission on Ododo’s behalf, said no single evidence of PW1 was admitted as evidence by the court on the ground that he failed to frontload his witness statement before hand.

Daudu said the tribunal was right to have expunged the evidence of PW1, having declared it inadmissible and added that the appellants failed to prove the allegation of over voting in their petition.

He also urged the tribunal to dismiss the allegations of forgery against his client, saying it bordered on pre-election matter, which the apex court had decided in Gbagi’s case against INEC.

Daudu, who said they failed to prove allegation of over-voting, also argued that Section 137 of the Electoral Act cited by the petitioners on allegations of over-voting did not apply in the instant petition.

He urged the court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgement of the tribunal which upheld the election of Ododo.

Corroborating Daudu’s argument, Emmanuel Ukala, SAN, who appeared for APC, prayed the appeal court to dismissed the petition for being incompetent.

On their part, Ajaka and his party, in the appeal predicated on 31 grounds, insisted that they are the winners of the November 11, 2023 governorship election and should be declared the rightful winner.

Their team of lawyer led by Mr Pius Akubo, SAN, urged the appellate court to set aside aside the judgement of the tribunal and declare Ajaka as the governor of Kogi state.

According to Akubo, the judgement of the tribunal which affirmed Ododo’s election was a serious miscarriage of justice.

It would be recalled that the tribunal had, on May 27, affirmed the victory of Governor Usman Ododo of APC in the November 11, 2023 Kogi State governorship poll.

The three-member panel of justices, headed by Justice Ado Birnin-Kudu, held that the petition was bereft of substance and accordingly dismissed it.

The tribunal held that SDP and Ajaka failed to prove the allegations of over-voting and non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022 in the petition.

The panel, in a unanimous decision held that all the Witnesses’ evidence filed before it were incompetent and full of inconsistencies.

It also agreed with the submissions of the respondents that the allegations of forgery raised in the petition were pre-election matter, which ought to have been raised 14 days after the documents were submitted to INEC.