PDP vs APC: Igbinedion loses at Edo tribunal against Idahosa | - Awareness Media Ng PDP vs APC: Igbinedion loses at Edo tribunal against Idahosa 2020 - Awareness Media Ng
PDP vs APC: Igbinedion loses at Edo tribunal against Idahosa

PDP Vs APC: Igbinedion Loses At Edo Tribunal Against Idahosa

The Election Petition Tribunal in Edo State has dismissed the petition by Hon. Omosede Igbinedion of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against Hon. Dennis Idahosa of the All Progressives Congress (APC) over the Ovia Federal Constituency seat.


Igbinedion had asked the tribunal to declare her winner of the election on grounds that Idahosa was a Canadian citizen and did not resign his appointment with the Federal Ministry of Environment as a member of the National Agency for Great Greenwall board.


In a unanimous judgment by the three-man panel headed by Justice O. Ogundana, the tribunal said there was no merit in the petition filed by Igbinedion.


Justice Ogundala said Igbinedion failed to prove her case beyond reasonable doubt because the PW8 called by the petitioner in respect of the allegation of dual citizenship was not the maker of the P99 document tendered



Related: COVID-19: AMB IKE OLIGBO STEPS IN FOR ANAMBRA RESIDENTS; DISTRIBUTES HAND SANITIZERS, HAND GLOVES, PROTECTIVE MASKS AND OTHER INCENTIVES

.


He said “Since PW8 is not the maker of the document he deposed before the tribunal, the tribunal did not attach any probative value to the document tendered"


“All these allegations have not in the least being proved by the petitioner not to talk of proving them beyond reasonable doubt. The reasons canvassed therefore have no merit and are hereby dismissed".


“The argument of the petitioners is most untenable. They did not show relevant documents and pleaded facts are not before the tribunal"


Aside the pleading of the grounds, the petitioners did not place anything on their side. They did not made prima facie case. Averments in petition prove nothing without evidence. The onus of prove has not shifted to the defendants.


“The petitioners failed to prove non-qualification. All these allegations have not been proven. Even if ground three has not been struck out, it would not have survived.”





Post Comment