The Kogi Central Senator elect, Yakubu Oseni has filed a case at Appeal Court to upturn the order of the Tribunal which granted the request of Natasha Akpoti, Social Democratic Party (SDP), to bring the evidence gathered from the inspection of electoral materials used for 2019 Kogi Central Senatorial election.
The Kogi State Election Petition Tribunal Sitting in Abuja on 1st of June in its ruling granted the SDP Senatorial Candidate, Natasha Akpoti the right to bring in more witnesses and use the evidence gathered in the inspection of the electoral materials used for the Kogi Central Senatorial Election as ordered by the Tribunal on March 29.
In the ruling of the Tribunal on 1st June, the chairman of the three man panel, Hon. Justice O. A. Chijioke held that, “the Petitioners with petition suit No. EPT/KG/SEN/02/2019, is seeking the relief of honourable tribunal to file for more witnesses in support of their case pursuant to the inspection of the electoral materials as ordered by the tribunal on March 29, 2019.
“There are argument that the Petitioners cannot file for more witnesses without the amendment of their petition, there are also argument questioning the provision of the law upon which the application was based.
“We have considered the issues above, the substance of the application is that the Petitioners are seeking to bring in evidence consequence upon inspection of electoral materials required by the honourable tribunal.
“It will not make any sense if the Petitioners will not be allowed to bring evidence of inspection ordered by the court. The only way they can do this is by filing additional statement for both of suggestion or filing statement of new witnesses or both.
“For the tribunal to deny the Petitioners the right to file for new witnesses consequence upon the inspection ordered by the tribunal will amount to lack of fair hearing”, he held.
While he was citing precedents in support of his ruling, Justice Chijioke further held that, “on the case of Abubakar against Yaradua 2008, 18 pg 77 and Oni against Fayemi 2008, 8 Nigeria weekly law report pt 1089 and pg 409, the oppositions to the motion lacks substance.
“We shall therefore grant the application consequently the relief is granted for the Petitioners to file additional written statement on oath of witnesses consequent upon the inspection of electoral materials ordered by this honourable tribunal on 29th March, 2019.
“Further more, the additional written statement on the oath of the first Petitioner, Natasha Hadiza Akpoti and the written statement of the witnesses is considered to have been properly filed and shall be used in the course of the hearing”, the tribunal chairman ruled.
The Senator elect, Yakubu Oseni, however, saw the implication of the tribunal’s ruling in the course of the trial ran to Court of Appeal to upturn the judgment and prevent Natasha Akpoti from using the evidence gathered from the inspection of electoral materials used for the senatorial election.
In his petition to court of Appeal, Oseni alleged that, the Tribunal erred in law when it granted the Petitioners Application to file two additional witness statement to the oath of 530 paragraphs, adding that it’s out of time and supplementary to the 44 paragraph petition earlier filed by the petitioner which he said will allow the Petitioners to amend their petition contrary to section 285 (5) of the 1999 constitution as amended.
Oseni further alleged that the tribunal in its ruling breached the extant provisions of the Nigerian Constitution as to time for the filing for election petition, adding that by so doing the Tribunal has denied the Appellant of the right to fair hearing and gave undue and unfair advantage to the Petitioners.
Oseni, however, sought the relief of the Court of Appeal to stop Natasha Akpoti of SDP from filing additional witness statement and prevent her from using the evidence she gathered in the course of inspecting the electoral materials on the ground that the Tribunal granted the order to inspect the electoral materials when the Petitioners have already filed their case.
Notice of Appeal:
