By Simeon Nwakaudu
The adoption of final written addresses by parties at the Rivers State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja threw up a very critical issue. The obvious failure of the APC and her governorship candidate, Mr Dakuku Peterside to discharge the burden of proof which rests on them because of their numerous false allegations that bordered on violence, electoral fraud and irregularities.
During the adoption of written addresses, it was a shocker to everyone when the lead counsel to the petitioner, Chief Akin Olujimi, SAN, argued that the burden of proof should be transferred to the Respondents.
This position was a last resort by the desperate petitioner as it was obvious that he neither called the relevant witnesses, nor tendered the right documents to prove his case. This failure is what has fatally decimated the petition. Other than the earlier propaganda promoted by sponsored media agents of the APC, nothing was done practically to adduce evidence in court.
Therefore, the Rivers State APC and her candidate in the course of a political game want the rules to be changed. Pray, why did the Rivers State APC allege that violence marred the governorship election when they had no proofs? How on earth would they expect the weakness of their case to be rewarded by the tribunal? A man who asserts must prove! Frivolous allegations hold no water.
What the counsel to Governor Wike, Emmanuel Ukala, SAN, said is instructive.
According to him : “You can see that based on the evidence that they called, we had no reason whatsoever to bother to put in any witness. In a whole state they called only three voters, in respect of which the decisions of the Supreme Court have always said that you must call one voter from every polling unit. There are 5972 polling units and points in Rivers State. They called only three voters and from three different local government areas for that matter. How could they ever dream to have started to prove their case?”
Ukala further declared that the Rivers State APC Governorship Candidate, Mr Dakuku Peterside was not qualified to contest the April 11 election because his nomination contravened Section 85 (1), of the Electoral Act.
He said the petition is not properly before the tribunal because the Rivers State APC Gubernatorial candidate was not duly nominated.
The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, urged the Rivers State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal to dismiss the petition filed by Rivers State All Progressives Congress, APC, Governorship Candidate, Mr Dakuku Peterside because it lacks merit and substance.
The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, also urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition declaring that the burden of proof rests with the petitioner, who failed to discharge same before the court.
In his submission, Counsel to the PDP, Chief Wole Olanipekun ( SAN ) noted that the petition is incompetent, pointing out that the tribunal has no jurisdiction to amend the petition of the APC, especially the outlandish reliefs already abandoned by the defeated political party.
He stated that whilst the petitioner alleged several cases of violence and abduction of voters, the petitioner failed to lead any in that direction or call any witness to prove his claim.
Counsel to INEC, Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, failed to prove his allegations polling unit by polling unit, noting that the few witnesses called by the petitioner were not participants in the election as directed by the Supreme Court.
He said the soldiers, mobile policemen and DSS operatives invited by the APC gave generic and contradictory evidence which have no relevance in relation to voting at the polling units, hence their testimonies are unreliable.
The INEC counsel declared that on the premise of the Supreme Court judgment in the case between Buhari and Obasanjo, INEC guidelines cannot supercede the Electoral Act, noting that accreditation is not restricted to card readers.
He added that the reports tendered by the Rivers State APC were rejected by INEC before the return of Governor Nyesom Wike was declared. He said such reports will no longer be tenable.
If not for propaganda purposes, why would a political party approach a tribunal when it had no data to prove its allegations?
Despite the failure of the petitioners, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, Governor Wike and the PDP ensured that credible witnesses who participated in the election testified at the tribunal while all the relevant documents used for the election were tendered and duly admitted in evidence.
With the benefit of all the election petition tribunals that have passed judgment so far, either in the governorship or legislative elections, none has shifted the burden of proof to the Respondents. All the tribunals have maintained that the Petitioners are expected to prove their cases on a polling unit by polling unit basis with evidence and credible witnesses. That is the position of the law. Your guess is as good as mine.
Simeon Nwakaudu,
Special Assistant (Media )to the Rivers State Governor.
Powered by Versicherungsvergleich
