Osun Governorship Poll: Tribunal Reserves Judgment on Adeleke, PDP Petition

The Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja has reserved judgment in the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate, Senator Ademola Adeleke, challenging the election of Governor Adegboyega Oyetola of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

The three-member tribunal led by Justice Ibrahim Sirajo reserved judgment on Thursday after all parties adopted their final written addresses.

Adeleke and the PDP, through their legal team led by Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, asked the tribunal to declare that Oyetola was not validly elected in either the September 22, 2018 governorship election or the September 27 supplementary poll.

The petitioners argued that Adeleke won the initial election and should have been declared governor by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

According to them, Adeleke polled 245,698 votes in the September 22 election, while Oyetola received 245,345 votes.

They contended that INEC acted wrongly when it declared the election inconclusive and ordered a supplementary poll.

The PDP and Adeleke alleged that the September 27 rerun was characterised by electoral violence, vote buying, ballot stuffing, multiple voting and other irregularities.

They maintained that when only valid votes from both elections were considered, Adeleke emerged as the rightful winner.

The petitioners further argued that Adeleke had satisfied the constitutional requirements to be declared elected after the September 22 poll and that there was no legal basis for a supplementary election.

Ikpeazu told the tribunal that INEC exceeded its powers by cancelling results and declaring the election inconclusive.

He argued that the role of a returning officer was limited by the Electoral Act and that INEC could not assume the functions of an election tribunal by reviewing and cancelling results after the poll.

The petitioners also tendered certified copies of result sheets which they said contained alterations and mutilations.

They argued that INEC had a responsibility to explain the discrepancies by calling witnesses or producing other documents used in arriving at the final result.

Adeleke and the PDP therefore asked the tribunal to nullify Oyetola’s return and declare Adeleke duly elected governor of Osun State.

INEC, Oyetola and APC Ask Tribunal to Dismiss Petition

The respondents — INEC, Governor Oyetola and the APC — urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition, arguing that the petitioners failed to prove their allegations.

INEC, represented by Lasco Pwahomdi, maintained that the PDP and Adeleke had not provided sufficient evidence to establish that the election was not free, fair and credible.

The commission consequently asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial costs.

Oyetola’s lawyer, Wole Olanipekun, SAN, also argued that the petitioners had failed to prove their case in accordance with the law.

He alleged that the petitioners had presented arguments in their final address that differed from the claims contained in their original petition.

Olanipekun further contended that the petitioners had effectively admitted irregularities affecting some of their own votes and could therefore not ask the tribunal to declare them winners based on an election they had partly challenged.

He also questioned the request to nullify Oyetola’s Certificate of Return, arguing that the document had not been placed before the tribunal.

According to him, election petitions must be decided on evidence and established legal principles rather than sentiment.

APC counsel Akin Olujimi, SAN, similarly argued that the evidence presented by the petitioners was insufficient to sustain the petition.

He maintained that Adeleke could not seek to be declared winner solely on the basis of the September 22 election while also rejecting the legitimacy of the supplementary poll held on September 27.

The respondents therefore urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition for lack of merit and legal competence.

After hearing the final arguments from all parties, the tribunal reserved judgment and said a date for the ruling would be communicated to the parties.