Ogun state governorship saga: Evidences before tribunal enough for us to defend Abiodun’s mandate, says electoral commission

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on Wednesday told the Governorship  Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abeokuta metropolis that the plethora of evidences before the panel were enough to defend the mandate of Governor Dapo Abiodun, declined to call any witness.

Penpushing reports that it is recalled that almost all the witnesses called by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)   across the State presented similar  statements, with substantial contradictory positions and established lies after being thoroughly cross examined,while  it’s star witness and expert invited by the party came up with huge discrepancies and irreconcilable data  in their separate presentations, thereby,  making Counsel to the 1st respondent( INEC) Olumide Ogidan, SAN, to submit  that the substantial grounds needed to be argued through witnesses’  statements had been explicitly established  before the Tribunal during cross examination.

The Senior Advocate of Nigeria therefore, prayed the panel for the 1st respondent to close it’s  case, that is even as he solicited for more days to attend to issues surrounding the reply  of the petitioners, citing exigencies at Presidential Election Petition Tribunal in Abuja,while in the same vein, counsel to the 2nd respondent(Governor Dapo Abiodun) Professor Taiwo Osipitan,SAN, aligned with the prayer of the counsel to the 1st respondent, saying all the Counsels to respondents were on the same page on prayer for  more days to move to Abuja and for the new subpoenae to get prepared.

Penpushing also reports that counsel to the 3rd respondent(APC)  Mr Tayo Oyetibo,  SAN, restated before the panel   of a new application which had just  been served on the petitioners  and other respondents on the ground that the paragraphs of the petitioners’ reply and witnesses’  statements  on OATH  sought to be struck  out but introduced new facts tending to add to the content of the petition adding that the  paragraphs  under review were highly prejudicial to the third respondent

The counsel pointed out that the new allegations of fact pleaded in some paragraphs of the petitioners’  reply raised  issues  which the third respondent could not have the opportunity to respond to,and the counsel to the petitioners, Gordy Uche, SAN, in his response said they have  have been served with the application but posited that they  shall vehemently oppose the application”.

Penpushing reports that the tribunal, in it’s ruling  said the adjournment became necessary despite the fact that it didn’t want to prepare judgement in an hurry, it, however, adjourned the case till Friday, 4th August, 2023.

FOOTNOTE: You want to share story with us? You want to advertise with us? You need publicity for product, or service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp +2348073463653 or email [email protected]