A dramatic exchange unfolded at the Ekiti State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Ado-Ekiti, as counsels representing the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP) engaged in a heated argument over procedural matters relating to the admissibility of documents and witness testimonies.
The tribunal, chaired by Justice Lekan Ogunmoye, resumed hearing on the petition filed by the SDP and its candidate, Engr. Segun Oni, challenging the victory of Governor Biodun Oyebanji of the APC in the June 18, 2022 governorship election. The SDP alleged irregularities, vote manipulation, and non-compliance with the Electoral Act, while the APC maintained that the election was free, fair, and credible.
Dispute Over Document Admissibility
The session became tense when the SDP counsel, Mr. Owoseni Ajayi, sought to tender additional documents purportedly obtained from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to support claims of irregularities in the collation process. The APC’s lead counsel, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), objected, arguing that the documents were not properly certified and therefore inadmissible under the Evidence Act.
Related News
Fagbemi contended that the petitioner’s counsel was attempting to “smuggle in uncertified materials” that could not be verified as authentic INEC records. He urged the tribunal to reject the documents outright, insisting that due process must be followed.
Ajayi, however, maintained that the documents were duly obtained from INEC and bore official stamps, adding that the objection was a deliberate attempt to frustrate the petitioner’s case. “We have complied with all procedural requirements. The respondents cannot dictate how the petitioner presents his evidence,” he argued.
The tribunal, after listening to both sides, reserved ruling on the admissibility of the contested documents until a later date.
Related News
Exchange Between Counsels
The verbal confrontation between the two senior lawyers briefly disrupted proceedings, prompting Justice Ogunmoye to caution both sides to maintain decorum. “This tribunal is not a marketplace for arguments. Let us proceed with civility and respect for the court,” the chairman warned.
Observers noted that the clash reflected the growing tension surrounding the petition, which has attracted significant public interest in Ekiti and beyond.
INEC and PDP Join as Respondents
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) were also listed as respondents in the petition. INEC’s counsel, Mr. Rotimi Ojo, aligned with the APC’s position, stating that the election was conducted in accordance with the law and that all results were properly transmitted and collated.
He urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition for lack of merit, describing the allegations as “speculative and unsubstantiated.”
The tribunal adjourned the sitting to allow the petitioner’s counsel to present additional witnesses and for the respondents to cross-examine them. Justice Ogunmoye reiterated that the panel would ensure fairness and transparency throughout the proceedings.
Legal analysts say the outcome of the tribunal could set a precedent for future electoral disputes in the state, especially regarding the interpretation of electronic transmission of results and certification of electoral documents.
The clash between APC and SDP counsels underscores the intensity of the ongoing legal battle over the Ekiti governorship election. As the tribunal continues its hearings, both parties remain confident of victory, while residents await a verdict that could reshape the state’s political landscape.
