PDP ask for declaration of Wada as governor as Tribunal reserves judgement

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) through its Counsel, Jibrin Okutepa asked the Kogi State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal to declare Engr. Musa Wada as the duly elected Governor of Kogi State in the November 16,  2019 election.  

Meanwhile,  the Kogi State Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja has reserved judgment in the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate, Musa Wada, in the November 16, 2019 governorship election in Kogi State.

The three-man panel of justices headed by Justice Kashim Kaigama, reserved judgment in the petition marked EPT/KG/GOV/06/2019 on Thursday after parties adopted their final written addresses.

Counsel to the petitioner, Jibril Okutepa (SAN), while adopting his brief, urged the court to uphold the petition and order that the first petitioner (Wada) be returned as the duly-elected governor of Kogi State, having won majority of votes cast in the election.

He also asked the court to reject every objection raised by the respondents in the matter.

The respondents in the petition include the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Governor Yahaya Bello and the All Progressives Congress (APC) as first, second and third respondents respectively.

Okutepa in further argument alleged massive rigging at the election and substantial non-compliance to electoral laws.

Earlier, lawyers to the respondents have urged the court to dismiss the petition in its entirety for lacking merit.

Counsels to the respondents, Dr. Alex Iziyon (SAN), Joseph Daudu (SAN) and Ahmed Raji (SAN), relied on all processes filed as well as final written addresses in urging the court to discountenance the petition.

The lawyers argued that there were seven local government areas out of 21 in the state and 2,548 polling units involved in the dispute but the petitioners did not present more than 32 witnesses to prove cases of alleged election malpractice, substantial non-compliance to electoral rules and other forms of irregularities as alleged.

They also faulted the petitioner for presenting a witness who informed the court that the petition gave rise to the report he tendered in court.

According to the counsels, the implication was that the report was made when the matter was already pending in court.