Emma Amaize

TOMORROW is judgment day at the Delta governorship re-run election petition tribunal sitting in Asaba in the case filed by Chief Great Ovedje Ogboru, questioning the victory of Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan in the January 6, 2011 poll in the state.

The re-run election was ordered by the Court of Appeal in Benin City, Edo State, November, 2009, after Uduaghan’s election in the April 14, 2007 governorship election was nullified.

The governor’s chief political rival is Ogboru, who contested both elections on the platform of the Democratic Peoples Party, DPP. Of course Uduaghan ran on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.

Both sides are expectant of victory on the matter tomorrow.

Asaba, the state capital, is already packed full with people of all shades, waiting to explode with joy or weep, depending on where the pendulum of justice swings.

A prominent Deltan called Sunday Vanguard, weekend, saying, “What is the security in and around the tribunal like? What about the state capital?”. Asked why he was harping on security, he said, “Just to be doubly sure”.

*Emmanuel Uduaghan & *Chief Great Ogboru,

Chairman of the three-man panel, Justice Uzoamaka Ogwurike, adjourned judgment on the petition by Ogboru, essentially seeking the court to declare him winner of the governorship re-run poll based on valid votes cast, to Monday, July 25, after hearing the addresses of counsel to both parties.

The petitioner is contending that he scored the majority of lawful votes in the election and that the umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, which is the third respondent in the case, adjudged the first respondent, Uduaghan, as winner.

Specifically, he called to question the conduct of the election in Warri North, Warri South, Warri South-West, Patani, Ika North East, Ethiope West, Bomadi and Isoko South Local Government Areas, which, he said, was not duly conducted.

His counsel, Mogbeyi Sagay, SAN, called witnesses and presented an address, last Thursday, with a view to persuading the tribunal.

Leading the defence team for Uduaghan, former national chairman of the Nigeria Bar Association, NBA, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, also called witnesses to convince the tribunal that election was conducted in the areas disputed by the petitioners just as in other parts of the state.

Counsel to the second respondent, PDP, Adebayo Adenipekun, did likewise, while INEC called its men, who were deployed for the election, to come to the witness box to tell its own side of the story.

The totality of the case presented by the defence is that the third respondent conducted an election, as it is statutorily demanded of it and the second respondent’s candidate, who is the first respondent in the case, emerged as the winner.

Bolt from the blue

The matter is now left for the tribunal to decide, but just before the court adjourned, last Thursday, there was a bolt from the blue.

It came like a judgment before the much- awaited judgment, but, this time, from the Federal High Court, also sitting in Asaba, presided over by Justice I.N. Buba.

The court held, in a different case by the chairman of the PDP in the state, Chief Peter Nwaoboshi, and his party, challenging the eligibility of Ogboru for the April 14, 2007 governorship election, which gave rise to the governorship re-run, that the first petitioner, who is disputing the outcome of the re-run, was not validly nominated for the election in the first instance.

The case, which was started at the Federal High Court, Abuja, was transferred to the Federal High Court, Asaba, and the defendants are, INEC, the Resident Electoral Commissioner, Delta State, Ogboru and the DPP.

According to the court, Ogboru was not nominated by 50 registered members of the DPP for the election as stipulated in the Electoral Act that guided the election, and, to that extent, his candidacy was not valid.

To many, the invalidation of Ogboru’s candidacy for the re-run should mean that his case at the governorship re-run tribunal had collapsed. And that is exactly the temperament that pervades the Uduaghan camp, 24 hours to tomorrow’s tribunal judgment.

From the Director-General of the PDP Campaign Council and Commissioner for Housing, Chief Paulinus Akpeki, to the Commissioner for Information, Chike Ogeah, and Warri North chairmanship aspirant, Comrade Omolubi Newuwumi, Ogboru has no business standing before the tribunal to ask for anything because he was not a candidate in any election.

Akpeki insisted that the Court of Appeal, Benin-City, which ordered the re-run in its November, 2010 judgment, was not fair to the PDP, as the party pointed out very clearly that Ogboru was not duly nominated, but the complaint was overlooked.

Ogeah believes that the matter has already been determined, while Omolubi said Ogboru should apologize to Deltans.

Ogboru, however, told Sunday Vanguard he found the whole thing amusing, as the matter at stake before the tribunal was not nomination for the re-run poll, but validity of the election that was conducted in the areas in dispute.

He said he would appeal against the judgment, which he described as “irresponsible and unfortunate’, saying he had traveled the same road before and was not surprised.

In any case, he said that whatever the court held against him with regards to nomination also applied to Uduaghan, as both of them filled the same INEC forms.

 Legal brickbats over nomination

At the tribunal, last Thursday, Olanipekun formally drew the court’s attention to the July 20 judgment of the Federal High Court, Asaba which ruled that Ogboru was not validly nominated for the re-run.

Citing legal authorities, he said the petitioner did not have the locus standi to institute the action by virtue of Section 137 (1) A of the Electoral Act.

He referred the tribunal to Rosspa against ACB Limited, 1993 NWLR, part 312, page 382, particularly at 435, 471, 472, adding that by virtue of Section 74 (3) of the Evidence Act , the court was enjoined to take judicial notice of the judgment.

Sagay, counsel to Ogboru, contended that the judgments of Justice Buba and others, which the first respondent’s counsel asked the court to rely on, were not pleaded and not before the court, and so should not be relied upon by the tribunal in arriving at its judgment.

He submitted that the Federal High Court judgment on the validity of Ogboru’s nomination for the re-run poll was not conclusive, as an appeal and motion for stay of execution were already pending on the matter to the knowledge of the respondents. He cited legal authorities to buttress his arguments.

Counsel to the PDP, Adenipekun, who aligned himself with the submission of Olanipekun that Ogboru was not a lawful candidate for the re-run poll, as had been resolved by Justice Buba, said the three-man governorship re-run tribunal was wrongly constituted and disqualified from entertaining the petition.

Battle of ballot papers

From the blast of whistle, both sides were at loggerheads over the ballot papers used for the re-run poll. It started from the joint inspection of the ballot papers and other documents used for the election.

While the DPP said there was partial compliance by INEC, PDP said there was complete compliance. Sagay objected to the admittance of ballot papers from Warri North and Isoko South as exhibits by the tribunal on the grounds that the two local governments were not jointly inspected, but all the ballot papers were later admitted.

He told the tribunal that the ballot papers tendered by INEC did not correspond with the respective wards and polling units, but the third respondent said the same way it classified ballot papers in the polling units, wards and areas the petitioner won was how it classified ballot papers in the units, wards and areas that the first respondent won.

Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, counsel to the third respondent, INEC, in his address, last Thursday, said the petitioners allegation that the commission did not conduct the election in parts of local government areas in the state was an acceptance that the poll took place in the local government areas, but that, contrary to the claim, the third respondent proved to the tribunal that it conducted the election with certified true copies that carry a “presumption of regularity”. He cited Section 150 of the Evidence Act to substantiate his position.

His words, “The case they pleaded was that the ballot papers were not stamped and signed, they never showed my lords one ballot paper that was not signed and one ballot paper that was not stamped. That is their case, they cannot change it”.

 Tempers

Tempers, however, rose between Sagay and Ken Mozia, one of the counsel to the first respondent, when the latter attempted to reply on supposed new issues of law raised by the former in his address. Sagay opposed the move, arguing that he had no right to speak again on the matter.

Mozia insisted that he had the right, saying, “You cannot stop me”, with Sagay responding, “You cannot bend the rules”. The tribunal saved the situation by asking the counsel to relax their nerves. It did not, however, give Mozia opportunity to make his point.

So, who laughs last on the January 6, 2011 governorship re-run election in Delta? That is the verdict Justice Ogwurike and other two members of the panel: Justices Ogbonna Okereke and Bello Duwale, will give tomorrow.