The Governorship Elections Petition Tribunal in Lafia, Nasarawa State, has reserved judgment on the petition challenging the outcome of the 2023 governorship poll in the state.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mr David Ombugadu, governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), is challenging the declaration of Gov. Abdullahi Sule of the APC as the winner of the 2023 governorship election.
The sitting on Thursday was slated for the adoption of final written addresses by counsels to the petitioner as well as the first, second and third respondents.
The Chairman of the three-man panel, Justice Ezekiel Ajayi, reserved the judgment after counsels to the petitioner and respondents adopted their final written addresses.
- Nigeria’s Olayiwola becomes first chartered master mariner in Africa
- 25-year-old Nigerian shines at New York film academy
The chairman, therefore, said that the tribunal would communicate to the parties through their counsels on the day of judgment.
Earlier, Kanu Agabi (SAN), lead counsel to the petitioner, told the tribunal that he had adopted all the arguments in his written address.
The petitioner’s counsel urged the tribunal to annul the Nasarawa State governorship election for noncompliance with the electoral act and declare the candidate of the PDP as the real winner of the election.
Agabi also explained that there was no relationship between the votes in the IREV and the final result that was declared.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the PDP’s candidate had the highest number of votes cast at the election, based on the records in the IREV and the information of the BVAS machines that were used at various polling units.
On their parts, counsels to the INEC, APC, and Gov. Sule, Mr Isiaka Dikko (SAN), Hassan Liman (SAN) and Messrs Wole Olanikpekun (SAN), adopted their final written addresses and called on the tribunal to dismiss the petition for lacking in merit.
Counsel to APC, Olanikpekun, also argued that the petitioner had dumped BVAS machines and IREV records at the tribunal without showing what was contained in the records.
He said that the petitioner only presented the records in the IREV and BVAS machines to the tribunal without displaying them for everyone at the tribunal to see.
He, therefore, said that the petitioner had failed to prove anything and urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition. (NAN)
