The Election Petitions Tribunal in Abuja yesterday reserved its judgment on the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Asue Ighodalo, challenging the outcome of the September 21, 2024, Edo State governorship poll.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) the winner of the election.

However, Ighodalo and his party asked the tribunal to invalidate the election’s outcome on the grounds of alleged non-compliance with the Electoral Act 2022. They further contended that Okpebholo did not secure the highest number of majority votes cast in that election.

The three-man tribunal headed by Justice Wilfred Kpochi reserved its judgment on the matter after all lawyers adopted their final written addresses. According to Justice Kpochi, a date for judgment will be communicated to the parties by the tribunal.

“The tribunal stands adjourned until then,” he said. At the resumed hearing of the matter, the counsel for the petitioners Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN) told the tribunal that the business of the day was for the adoption of final written addresses. Counsel to INEC Kanu Agabi (SAN) proceeded to adopt the final address of his client. Agabi asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition for lack of merit.

He said this was based on the grounds that the tribunal could not annul the election because it was not one of the reliefs sought by the petitioners.

He also said the tribunal could not declare the petitioners as winners of that election in the light of their own assertion that the election was invalid.

INEC asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition based on the fact that all the polling unit agents called as witnesses signed the result sheet and they could not distinguish between what they heard and what they saw.

Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), lawyer for Okpebholo, asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition because it had become an academic exercise. On the contentious Form EC25b where the petitioners claimed the serial numbers of sensitive materials must be given, Ikpeazu said all that was required for the form was the quantity of electoral materials received and quantity returned.

He added that a pronouncement of the Supreme Court said that one could not prove over voting without the Bimodal Verification Authentication System (BVAS) Machines but that none of the machines was opened to allow the tribunal to look at the content.

According to him, the petitioners by not tendering the right documents, failed to prove over voting on the whole. Emmanuel Ukala, who represents the APC, said:

“By the nature of the case they pleaded, the Supreme Court has over the years laid down that they need to prove this by polling unit to polling unit, ward to ward and local government by local government.” He, however, held that rather than prove this, the petitioners dumped documents on the court.

He also said since the petitioners failed to demonstrate how the BVAs worked, it was clear that the case of the petitioners was not proved and it should be dismissed. Counsel for the petitioners, Ken Mozie (SAN), said that with 4519 polling units in Edo, the complaint in the petition was concerning 765 of them.