All certificates presented to the Independent National Electoral
Commission, INEC by Comrade Adams Oshiomhole to contest the July 14,
2012 governorship election have been described as mere documents.
Gen.
Charles Airhiavbere who is challenging Governor Oshiomhole’s election
at the State Election Petition Tribunal, made this claim in his evidence
to close his case at the Tribunal in an attempt to prove that Governor
Oshiomhole was not qualified to contest the election.
Responding
to a question from Ken Mozia (SAN), Counsel to the ACN, the PDP
candidate disagreed that the documents presented by the first
Respondent, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole from Ruskin College, Oxford
University from where he bagged a Diploma in Labour Studies and another
issued by Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, were not certificates,
insisting that they were mere documents.
Cross-examined by Counsel
to Oshiomhole, Chief Adeniyi Akintola SAN, Airhianbere denied being
forced to retire from the Nigerian Army as a result of his indictment.
“I
retired meritoriously from the Nigerian Army after serving for 37 years
instead of 35; from boy soldier to officer. I also served as a diplomat
for this country in Washington DC. I have never been detained or found
wanting thorough out my duties in the Army.”
The Petitioner who
agreed to a question by Akintola that he did not win his polling unit or
local government at the election, told the Tribunal that although he
was not present at the over 2,627 polling units in the State, he relied
on what he was told by the party’s agents across the State.
Earlier,
there was legal fireworks between the Plaintiff’s Counsel, Chief Efe
Akpofure (SAN) and Counsel to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents, Messers
Adeniyi Aknitola (SAN), Prince Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN) and E.R.
Emukperhuo on the admissibility of clippings of the Nigerian Tribune of
12th July 2012 and Western Regional Gazette and maps of 1956 as
exhibits.
While Chief Akintola, Oyeyipo and Emukperhuo contended
that the documents in question must be pleaded and listed, they
described the tendering of the documents by the Petitioner as a
classical case of the abuse of Court process.
They submitted that
under Order 20, Rule 3 of the Federal High Court and under the 4th
Schedule of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended, such documents must be
filed along with the petition and must not just be listed.
“We did
not oppose earlier documents sought to be tendered because we knew they
were listed and pleaded. But in this case, they left everybody as sea
on what national newspaper they were talking about. There are conditions
that must be met, but this was not done in this case. The Petitioner
cannot hide under any other documents, the pleadings must be complete.
“It
is against the rule of pleadings, it’s very inchoate. No map or gazette
was listed in the petition, and I therefore urge the Tribunal to reject
the documents and throw them out through the window,” Chief Akintola
argued.
In his submission, Counsel to the Petitioner, Chief
Akpofure, submitted that there was a gross misconception by Counsel to
the Respondents in relation to the Court process.
He said the
authorities cited by the Respondents’ Counsel were grossly inapplicable
to the circumstances of the proceeding before the Tribunal, adding that
the case off the Petitioner was that the first Respondent was not
qualified academically to contest the election at the time he did.
He therefore asked the Tribunal to admit the documents as exhibits.
In
his ruling, the Tribunal Chairman, Justice Muazu Pindiga, said after
“considering the submission of Counsel and our attention being drawn to
the ruling of the Tribunal and mindful of the Court of Appeal ruling, it
is our view that the issue be viewed with caution. We therefore
admitted the documents to be tendered as exhibits.”
Further
hearing in the petition has been adjourned to next week Wednesday when
the Respondents in the petition are expected to open their defence.
No comments:
Post a Comment