The Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal continued its proceedings on Saturday, January 18, 2025, with the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate, Dr. Asue Ighodalo, presenting further documentary evidence to support their challenge to the election results. The petitioners, who had already submitted over a thousand documents the previous day, significantly bolstered their case by tendering a substantial volume of additional certified documents related to the conduct of the September 21, 2024, gubernatorial election. This second wave of evidence primarily focused on voter registration, accreditation figures, and results from various sources, including INEC’s Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines and the INEC Results Viewing (IREV) portal. The aim of the petitioners was to establish discrepancies and irregularities that they argue affected the outcome of the election and justify their claim that Dr. Ighodalo should be declared the rightful winner.
The newly presented evidence encompassed a wide range of electoral materials. This included certified true copies (CTCs) of voter registers from 55 polling units, accreditation figures extracted from 56 BVAS machines, and further extracts of accreditation data from 72 other BVAS devices. Crucially, the petitioners also submitted 75 CTCs of INEC’s Form EC8A, which contains the official results from each polling unit, as well as 70 CTCs of Form EC25B, the polling unit booklet. The inclusion of these forms, alongside data from the IREV portal, aimed to provide a comprehensive picture of the voting process and highlight any inconsistencies between the recorded figures and the declared results. The sheer volume of documents submitted underscored the petitioners’ commitment to substantiating their claims of electoral malpractice and irregularities.
Adding to the weight of their evidence, the PDP and Dr. Ighodalo also tendered 66 copies of polling unit voter registers and 125 copies of Form EC8A sourced directly from the IREV portal, all certified by INEC. They further submitted an additional 125 copies of Form EC8A directly certified by INEC, 101 copies of Form EC8A, and a CTC of a polling unit-by-polling unit BVAS report for Edo State, accompanied by a certificate of compliance from INEC. This multi-pronged approach, drawing on both physical documents and electronic records, aimed to create a robust and verifiable record of the election proceedings, allowing the tribunal to cross-reference information and assess the accuracy and integrity of the declared results.
In a move intended to further solidify their case, the petitioners presented a CTC of a certificate of compliance related to the BVAS machines used in 133 polling units, along with a copy of the serial numbers of those machines. This evidence sought to demonstrate the authenticity and proper functioning of the BVAS devices used in the specified polling units, preemptively addressing any potential challenges to the validity of the electronic accreditation data. By providing this technical documentation, the petitioners aimed to reinforce the credibility of the BVAS records as a reliable source of voter accreditation information. The presentation of this evidence signifies a strategic move to emphasize the importance of the electronic data in their overall argument.
The respondents in the case – the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Governor Monday Okpebholo, and the All Progressives Congress (APC) – were represented by their respective legal counsels, Abdullahi Aliyu, SAN, Offiong Offiong, SAN, and Chief Ferdinand Orbih, SAN. While they acknowledged the submission of the documents, they raised objections to their admissibility as evidence. However, in line with standard legal procedure, they reserved their detailed arguments against the admissibility of the documents for a later stage, known as the address stage, where they will have the opportunity to fully articulate their reasons for opposing the inclusion of the presented evidence. This strategic move allows them to review the documents in detail and formulate a comprehensive legal strategy to challenge their relevance and validity.
The presiding judge, Justice Wilfred Kpochi, adjourned the hearing to Monday, January 20, 2025, to allow for the continuation of the petition hearing. This adjournment provides time for all parties to prepare for the next phase of the proceedings, giving the respondents the opportunity to scrutinize the newly submitted evidence and formulate their counter-arguments. The upcoming sessions promise to be crucial as the tribunal delves deeper into the evidence presented and assesses its impact on the validity of the contested election results. The petitioners’ core argument rests on their claim that Dr. Ighodalo secured the majority of valid votes cast in the election, a claim they hope to substantiate through the presented documentary evidence. The tribunal’s ultimate decision will hinge on its evaluation of the evidence and the arguments put forth by both sides.
