Paragraph 1: The Ondo State Governorship Election and its Aftermath
The Ondo State gubernatorial election, held on November 16, 2024, saw Lucky Aiyedatiwa of the All Progressives Congress (APC) emerge victorious, securing a total of 366,781 votes. This victory, however, was met with challenges as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), along with four other political parties – the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Action Alliance (AA), Allied Peoples’ Movement (APM), and African Democratic Congress (ADC) – lodged petitions against the declared outcome. These petitions alleged widespread irregularities and electoral malpractices, claiming the election was marred by issues such as multiple thumb printing, over-voting, and malfunctions of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) across various polling units. This set the stage for a legal battle that would test the validity of the election.
Paragraph 2: The Petitioners’ Case and Allegations
The core of the petitioners’ arguments revolved around alleged breaches of electoral law. They contended that the irregularities, particularly multiple thumb printing and over-voting, significantly impacted the election results and compromised the integrity of the process. The failure of the BVAS, a crucial technology for voter accreditation, was also highlighted as a major flaw. The petitioners sought to prove that these issues were widespread and systematic, thereby undermining the legitimacy of Aiyedatiwa’s victory. Their burden was to provide substantial evidence to support these claims and convince the tribunal that the irregularities were substantial enough to warrant overturning the election results.
Paragraph 3: The Tribunal’s Judgment and Reasoning
The Ondo State Election Petition Tribunal, a three-man panel presided over by Justice Benson Ogbu, delivered a unanimous judgment dismissing all petitions. The tribunal deemed the petitions incompetent, lacking merit, and frivolous. Specifically, the PDP’s petition, filed alongside its candidate Agboola Ajayi, was dismissed because the petitioners failed to discharge the burden of proof required by law. The tribunal emphasized that mere allegations of non-compliance were insufficient; the petitioners needed to demonstrate how these instances of non-compliance substantially affected the election outcome.
Paragraph 4: Dismissal of Allegations and Lack of Evidence
The tribunal systematically addressed the petitioners’ allegations, finding them unsubstantiated. The claims of corrupt practices and non-compliance with the Electoral Act were struck out due to a lack of credible evidence. The judges pointedly stated that without concrete evidence linking the alleged irregularities to the final results, the tribunal could not determine the extent to which they impacted the election. The PDP’s assertions of electoral irregularities and over-voting were similarly dismissed as unsupported by sufficient evidence.
Paragraph 5: Post-Judgment Reactions and Potential Appeal
Following the judgment, the PDP’s legal counsel, Olujimi Oluseye, expressed respect for the judges but indicated that the party would review the judgment and consider an appeal. Oluseye highlighted the client’s constitutional right to seek further redress. The process of obtaining a certified true copy of the judgment would begin, after which a thorough analysis would determine whether to pursue an appeal.
Paragraph 6: Aiyedatiwa’s Response and Call for Unity
Governor Aiyedatiwa welcomed the tribunal’s judgment, expressing gratitude and emphasizing that the mandate given to him by the people of Ondo State had been reaffirmed. He extended an olive branch to the opposition, urging them to join forces with his administration for the betterment of the state. Aiyedatiwa reiterated his call for collaboration and emphasized the importance of working together to advance the development of Ondo State, irrespective of political affiliations. He suggested that the opposition could contribute their ideas to the government’s initiatives for the collective benefit of the state.
