• Seeks Aguariavwodo’s sack

BY Ikechukwu     Nnochiri
ABUJA—All Progressives Party, APC, yesterday, dragged the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, before a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, alleging that there was electoral fraud in the recently concluded bye-election for Delta Central Senatorial District.

Besides, APC and its candidate at the election which held on October 12, 2013, Mr Oghenetega Emerhor, told the court that it had garnered sufficient evidence with a view to proving that the PDP, connived with one Mr Olawale Dawodu, an official of INEC in Abuja, and smuggled in forged documents it said were relied upon to endorse the Nomination Form of Senator Edesiri Aguariavwodo who eventually won the election.

It alleged that in defiance of the time limit that was set by INEC for the submission of nomination forms, PDP not only failed to meet the deadline, but also bribed INEC official to write a false date of receipt on the nomination form of its candidate.

Consequently, the plaintiffs, while contending that Senator Aguariavwodo of the PDP was not a valid candidate at the said election, applied for an order of the court, directing the Inspector General of Police and the Attorney General of the Federation, to, forthwith, prosecute both the PDP, Senator Aguariavwodo and the accused INEC official, Mr Dawodu.

In a 20-paragraphed statement of claim filed in support of the suit, the plaintiffs further told the court that the 1st defendant, Aguariavwodo’s nomination and C.F. 001 forms, were not submitted to the 3rd defendant (INEC) on the last day of submission of list which was September 26, 2013. “1st defendant was not validly nominated by the 2nd defendant (PDP) to contest the bye-election into the office of senator for the Delta Central Senatorial District.

“The plaintiffs aver that the failure of the 1st and 2nd defendants to submit the nomination and CF001 Forms of the 1st defendant to the 3rd defendant latest 26/9/2013 is vital and mandatory condition precedent to 1st defendant subsequent valid participation in the election.

“Notwithstanding the facts that 1st defendant’s nomination forms were not received at the close of submission on 26/9/2013, the 3rd defendant invalidly included his name and published it as part of the final list of candidates standing nominated for the bye-election of 12/10/2013. The 1st defendant was not a candidate at the election and should not have been allowed to campaign for votes.”

Meantime, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, is yet to assign the case to any judge for adjudication.

“The 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants made 1st defendant’s nomination and forms C.F. 001 and affidavit in support of personal particulars to bear a false date of reception knowing it to be false and with intent that it may in any way be used or acted upon as genuine by the 3rd defendant.”