Ekiti rerun result dated April 25, 2008

Source: The Nation Newspaper Published:Tuesday, January 26th, 2010

Odunayo Ogunmola

Was the last governorship rerun election in Ekiti State held in 2008?

This was one of the questions that revelations at the Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal threw up during yesterday’s proceedings.

The tribunal heard that the official result sheet in one of the units in Ipoti Ward A, in Ijero Local Government Area of the state, was dated April 25, 2008.

One of the documents before the five-man jury hearing the dispute that emanated from the conduct of the rerun poll indicated that the official stamp affixed on Form EC8A showed that the election held in Unit 002 in Ipoti Ward A was conducted on April 25, 2008.

The governorship rerun election was conducted in 61 wards across 10 local government areas of the state on April 25, last year. The poll was held in two wards in Oye town on May 5, the same day the result of the election was announced.

The revelation came to light when the House of Assembly member representing Ijero Constituency, Hon. Lai Oke, was being cross-examined on Form EC8A for Unit 002 in Ipoti Ward A, where he claimed to have voted.

When confronted with Exhibit 31, the Form EC8A, the official result sheet of the unit where he claimed to have voted, Oke admitted that the stamp on the electoral document was dated April 25, 2008 (i.e. 25/04/08).

This was during the continuation of the defence of the second respondent, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The first respondent, Governor Segun Oni, closed his case last Wednesday after calling 67 witnesses.

Oke was grilled by counsel to the Action Congress (AC) and its governorship candidate, Dr Kayode Fayemi, Mr Ayodeji Odu, after the tribunal had ruled against the objections of counsel to all respondents in the governorship case.

Lawyers to all respondents had objected when Oke, the PDP Leader in the House of Assembly, first appeared before the tribunal last Friday to give evidence in support of the poll conducted in his unit and ward.

The tribunal had earlier ruled that Oke, the Respondent Witness 70 (RW 70), could be cross-examined on the official result sheet from his unit after which Odu began the state legislator’s cross-examination.

In the course of Oke’s cross-examination, alleged over-voting was discovered at the unit. Oke admitted that the number of used ballot papers was 188 while the total number of accredited voters was 185.

When asked by Odu whether he (Oke) was aware that the number of accredited voters at any election should tally with the number of used ballot papers, Oke replied that he was not an official of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and never knew the internal workings and rules of the electoral agency.

Oke, who revealed that he became an active politician in 2006, said he was not in court last Wednesday when Oni gave evidence. He also told the panel that he only came to the court once during the pre-trial session.

Adewale said he did very much to convince the witness to appear in court because he did not want a situation in which the witness, who had commenced his evidence on Friday, would not come to court on Monday.

Odu apologised and continued his cross-examination.

While denying knowing Biodun Ojo and Tope Faluyi in his ward in response to further questions from Odu, Oke admitted knowing Tope Arigbede, Biodun Osoaro and Ayo Awe. He said Awe was a two-time vice chairman of Ijero Local Government.

Olawale Akodu, the Respondent Witness (RW) 71, gave evidence.

The witness said he voted at Unit 007 in Ipoti Ward A and returned to his home after casting his ballot.

Responding to questions from counsel to Oni, Chief Duro Adeyele (SAN), Akodu denied seeing Oke and RW 69 Olufemi Ayeni, a lawyer, on the day of the election, adding that it was not true that he went to Unit 008 at his ward to disrupt election.

Under cross-examination from counsel to the INEC and the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC), Mr. Roland Otaru (SAN), the witness said from the period of his accreditation to when he voted, the election was peaceful.

He refuted the claim of the Petitioner Witness 20 (PW 20), Adeyinka Adumati, that he (Akodu) and other PDP henchmen went from one polling unit to the other, chasing away voters and disrupting voting.

Akodu, in response to further questions from Otaru, admitted knowing PW 16 Omolewa Abiodun whom he described as his younger brother but claimed that Philips Arogundade Seun was the AC agent at the unit and not Abiodun.

Under cross-examination from Odu, Akodu explained that he was the PDP vice chairman in the ward, adding that party agents that manned polling units were appointed by the party leadership in the state.

He claimed that one Arogundade wore a red shirt with AC logo on the day of the election but when asked by Odu to show the tribunal the portion in his witness statement on oath that Arogundade wore a red shirt, the witness claimed to be an illiterate who could not read from the document.

When Odu asked him where he was between 8.30am and 11.30am when he went to vote as claimed in his witness statement on oath, Akodu said he went to his farm to harvest okro.

Odu then said it was because the witness went to the farm to harvest okro that made him not to know the INEC materials used for the election, while Akodu maintained that he was only interested in voting.

Akodu denied using the period of going to the farm to harvest okro to going to other polling units to disrupt election.

RW 72 Adebayo Ogundele described Arogundade as his nephew and claimed that he did not see Akodu, the PDP vice chairman, on the day of the election.

Odu objected to an attempt by Adewale to re-examine RW 73 Sunday Ariyo, a councillor for Ipoti Ward A, insisting that there was no time the witness mentioned "the family house" of Ogundele when he (Odu) was asking him (Ariyo) of Ogundele’s place of residence.

Ariyo had told the petitioners’ counsel that Ogundele lived at Ipoti High School and had earlier given evidence to the effect that he did not know the distance between Sirajudeen polling unit 007 and Ipoti High School.

In his attempt to re-examine Ariyo, Adewale said the witness should be allowed to give further explanation on the issue of "family house" which he said would assist the course of justice.

Countering Adewale, Odu quoted from Section 189 (3) of the Evidence Act, arguing that the section prescribes the conditions under which a witness can be re-examined.

Hearing continues today.

Tribunal chair, Justice Hamma Barka, at this juncture, consulted with brother judges on the panel on whether the re-examination should be allowed or not. He said the issue of "family house" was not reflected in the records of the judges.

Justice Barka, however, warned lawyers not to overheat the polity but urged them to assist the court to arrive at justice. He explained that lawyers’ first duty is to the court of law.


Comments

Jag | Iloro-Ekiti  | March 6th, 2010

Very interesting scenario. Goodluck to you all in your efforts at gaining political power and positions to steal, loot and stash away. This is the naked reason for all these manipulations, false witnesses, cooked stories et al. A day shall come when the real peoples government that will cater for peoples needs will take over. It will not be long! In the meantime, you guys can busy yourselves in arrant display of incompetencies and corrupt ambitions.

Your Comment

Full Name:

Email address:

Location:

Comment:

Todays News