August 14, (THEWILL) – The Cross River State Governorship elections petition tribunal has reserved judgement in a suit seeking to nullify the election of the Governor of Cross River State, Bassey Otu.
The suit, which is marked as No: EPT/’CR/GOV/02/2023, was jointly instituted by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Governorship flag bearer, Professor Sandy Onor and his party against the election of Senator Bassey Otu and his deputy, Peter Odey.
Addressing the court, counsel to the petitioners, Dr J. Y. Musa SAN, told the court that evidence extracted under cross-examination of the respondents goes to fortify the case of their petition and also confirm the falsity of the evidence presented by the second and third respondents (Governor Otu and Peter Odey).
He said the case of the petitioners is not allegations of forgery against any of the respondents and so all the authorities they cited to the effect that they needed to call witnesses from institutions are non-sequitur, rather their case is that the second and third respondents lied on oath.
In the process of trying to say they did not lie on oath, they opened Pandora’s box where we saw the discrepancies.
He told the court that the Governor did not provide any document in his particulars is personal qualification but in order to answer it, they brought certificates that were in contradistinction and were not attached to Form EC9, which is why they said he lied on oath.
He urged the tribunal to declare the votes of the second and third respondents wasted because they were not qualified to stand for the election and declare the petitioners’ winner of the elections as they have the geographical spread to be declared winners.
On his part, lead counsel to the second and third respondents Prof. Mike Ozekhone SAN, urged the court to dismiss the petition for being frivolous, unmeritorious, gold-digging, distracting and for constituting an abuse of the court process.
He added that the withdrawal of grounds two and three by the petitioners sounded a death knell to their own petition because it was an admission that the elections were validly held.
On his part, counsel to the first respondents (INEC) K. O. Balogun urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition and also adopted Professor Ozekhome’s submission in respect of the qualification of the second and third respondents.
Also speaking, counsel to the fourth respondent (APC) Essien Andrew SAN, adopted his written address and aligned himself with the arguments of the lawyers for the first to the third respondent.
He also urged the tribunal to dismiss the case in its entirety.
After listening to the final arguments of the parties, Justice Oken Inneh thanked the litigants for the efforts they put into the case.
She subsequently adjourned the matter for judgment and said the date of judgement will be communicated to all the parties in due course.
About the Author
THEWILL Correspondent, Aniekan Bassey has over six years experience that spans across several fields in print journalism including development communication, sexual reproductive and health rights issues, crime, climate change, social justice, business and human interest stories.
