Parties in the 2023 Senatorial Elections Petition Tribunal seating in Calabar, Cross River State, Thursday, adopted their final written addresses.
The parties are All Progressives Congress (APC) and Sen Ben Ayade, who are the first and second petitioners respectively, while, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Sen Jarigbe Agom Jarigbe and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) who are joined by as first, second and third Respondents respectively.
It will be recalled that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), announced Sen Jarigbe Agom Jarigbe of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) as the winner of the Cross River North senatorial district election.
However, dissatisfied with the outcome of the election, both APC and Sen Ben Ayade approached the court and filed a suit number EPT/CR/SEN/02/2023 to invalidate it.
Addressing the court, counsel to second respondent, Mbah Ukweni, SAN, admitted that the petitioner’s evidence during cross-examination contradicts their written statement, pointing out that no single report from security agencies are before the Tribunal about corrupt practices.
He said the petitioner cannot be seeking to be declared winner of the same election he is saying was null and void.
He described the petition as most bizarre, stressing that the petition should be dismissed with excruciating cost awarded to the petitioner.
On the other hand, lead counsel to the first and second petitioners Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, pleaded that the court adopt his written address and opined that the INEC should be lashed for committing serial acts of illegality and then want to take advantage of their own illegalities.
It was the same INEC that certified and gave us form EC8A, they cannot not now turn around to say we should have used form EC81. Form EC8A was for the Presidential election and EC81 was for senatorial election, he said.
In his words: “It was the same INEC that gave it to us, so you want to profit from your illegality.
The same INEC that sent a witness, Mrs Mercy Atawodi, who was not cooperating because we subpoena her that we had to treat her as a hostile witness. The same INEC that will not bring out BVAS machine with the argument that the BVAS machine had already been erased after the Presidential election awaiting the governorship election. So having not brought it, it means that under section 147 of the Evidence Act, they were hiding a piece of evidence that they know if produced was inimical to their case.
“We have demonstrated that there was insecurity, there was violence, there was militarization of the polling units and they were arguing in a most funny way that we should have brought security reports from the same security they paid to disrupt the election, that practically impossible.
The Tribunal adjourned for a date to be named and communicated to all parties.
The tribunal, led by Justice M. A. Sambo as chairman and justices C. Akabua and J. Zululu, as members, announced it would communicate a date for judgment to the parties after counsels adopted their final written addresses.
and then