Tribunal dismisses LP’s petition – TheNigerialawyer

An Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Lagos on Monday
dismissed a petition filed by the Labour Party (LP) and reaffirmed
Mr Babajide Sanwo-Olu as the duly elected Governor of Lagos State
in the March 9 polls.

The tribunal described the petition as a “futile and wasteful
exercise”, noting that the petitioners (LP and Ifagbemi Awamaridi,
its governorship candidate in the election) could not prove their
allegations of mental incompetence against Sanwo-Olu in their
evidence before the tribunal.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the three-man
panel of judges led by Justice T. T Asua, in its three-hour
judgment, held that the petitioners also failed to prove their
allegations of election malpractice against Sanwo-Olu and his
party, the All Progressives Congress (APC).

It held that its earlier decision to dismiss the petition which
was later appealed by the petitioners was still valid because the
petition was not filed according to the laws governing the
electoral laws.

“The petitioners have failed to meet the requirement of the law.
The petitioners have failed in our humble view to discharge the
onus of proof which would have been placed on the Respondents.

“We confirm the return of Babajide Sanwo-Olu as the duly elected
Governor of the State,”Asua said.

Earlier, the tribunal had struck out the names of the fourth to
seventh respondents (The Resident Electoral Commissioner for Lagos
State INEC, Returning Officer for Lagos State Governorship
Election, the Commissioner of Police in Lagos State and the Nigeria
Army).

It held that from evidence adduced, there were no ties linking
them to the allegations contained in the petition.
NAN reports that during the hearing of the petition, the
Petitioners had called six witnesses (including Awamaridi and three
subpoenaed witnesses) while the Respondents did not call any
witness.

Regarding Sanwo-Olu’s alleged mental ill health, the tribunal in
the judgment said that the petitioners could not prove their
allegations which were contained in paragraphs 19 and 20 of the
Petition.

“No scintilla of evidence was presented to prove the assertion
that the second respondent is of unsound mental health.

“No newspaper evidence and medical evidence from the Gbagada
General Hospital was presented at the tribunal.

“PW5 openly stated in court that ‘the evidence does not exist’.
That portion of the petition remains abandoned, and I so hold,”Asua
said.

The tribunal noted that Awamaridi, while testifying during the
hearing of the petition, said that he did cast a vote during the
March 9 gubernatorial polls because he was certain his Permanent
Voters Card (PVC) was cloned.

According to the tribunal, Awamaridi in his testimony could not
pinpoint where the alleged irregularities took place, but rather
asserted that everything within his knowledge was said by his
agents.

“The journey of this petition has been a futile and wasteful
exercise. PW1 (Awamaridi) as a witness, dumped the evidence on the
tribunal and expected it to go on a voyage of discovery.

“Each document has to be related to the case; PW1 did not tie
any of the evidence to the case. Since the petitioners did not link
Exhibits P18 to P20 to their case, the evidence lacks probative
value and are not relevant to their case.

“The petitioners have failed to structure the case within the
parameters set by the apex courts. PW1, PW2 and PW4 testified in
relation to polling units but could not tie their allegations to
any specific polling unit,” the tribunal held.

Following the judgment, Mr Bola Aidi, counsel to the petitioners
told the tribunal that the judgment would be studied.

“We are grateful for the time of the Judge on the judgment, we
shall look at it and do the needful,” Aidi said.

Counsel to Sanwo-Olu, Mr Victor Okpara thanked the tribunal for
the judgment, and described the doggedness of the petitioners as
“the beauty of democracy”.

Mr Tunde Falola, Counsel to the APC appreciated the panel for
the time spent on the judgment.

Justice Asua said that the records of the judgment would be made
available within 24-hours.

As at time of filing this report, the tribunal went on a break
to reconvene to deliver a judgment on a similar petition filed by
the Alliance for Democracy.

Subscribe ToNairalaw News!