Okolie Wants Elumelu’s Petition Dismissed as Tribunal Reserves Judgment

Omon-Julius Onabu in Asaba

The National and State Houses of Assembly Election Petitions Tribunal sitting at Asaba on Saturday drew the curtains on the legal fireworks in the petition filed by the former Minority Leader in the House of Representatives, Hon Ndudi Godwin Elumelu, of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) challenging the victory of the Labour Party’s Candidate, Hon. Ngozi Lawrence Okolie, for the Aniocha/Oshimili Federal Constituency in Delta State.

This followed the formal adoption of written addresses of both parties vis-a-vis oral arguments canvassed by their respective counsel, but the verdict would be at a date to be announced later.

Counsel to Elumelu, Mr. Ken Mozia (SAN), maintained that the tribunal should grant the petitioner’s prayer claiming that there was no valid primary that threw up Ngozi Okolie, adding that the LP candidate was not qualified.

On the other hand, Okolie’s Lead Counsel to Okolie, Mr. Chike Onyemenan (SAN), submitted that the petition should be dismissed on several grounds, claiming that “the petitioners, Hon. Ndudi Elumelu and PDP abandoned their claims that Honourable Ngozi Okolie of the Labour Party (LP) won the election into the Aniocha/Oshimili Federal Constituency by a landslide victory by defeating Honourable Ndudi Elumelu with more than 20,000 (twenty thousand) votes.

“That the petitioners also abandoned their claims that the election was rigged or was invalid and that the tribunal should declare the election null and void and order INEC to conduct fresh election for Aniocha/Oshimili Federal Constituency.

“That the counsel for the 3rd Respondent, Mr. Chike Onyemenam, consequently urged the tribunal to strike out grounds 14(2) & 14(3) of the petition and paragraphs 15, 18-33 of the petition since both parties agree that they have been abandoned.”

Counsel to the 3rd Respondent (Okolie) then prayed the honourable tribunal to dismiss the entire petition because “the only ground remaining in the petition is the claim by the petitioners that Hon. Ngozi Okolie was not qualified to contest the election for several reasons.”

Onyemenan further submitted that since none of three witnesses called by the petitioners adopted a deposition or gave any oral evidence to say that Hon. Ngozi Okolie was not qualified to contest the election for any reason, the petition is deemed in law to have been abandoned as the Supreme Court has decided that where a petitioner fails to field a witness to adopt his deposition or fails to lead oral evidence in respect of the petitioner’s claims, the petition is dead and cannot be revived by looking for evidence from the opponents (defendants) to revive a dead petition.”

Citing Supreme Court decisions, which recently held that the “tribunal is also not permitted by law to start inspecting the INEC documents and reports tendered by the petitioners’ counsel from the bar and by the INEC’s witness on subpoena without any evidence to support or link the documents and reports to any part of the petition; so as to discover violations inside the Documents, because the Supreme Court has decided that such documents dumped on a tribunal without oral evidence are worthless documents.”

In conclusion, Onyemenam also cited Supreme Court Judgments, which established that PDP and its candidate do not have the locus standi or right to complain that Labour Party and its candidate did not hold primary election for which the petitioners equally did not lead any oral evidence in respect of, save to tender reports and exhibits not linked to any oral evidence or any part of the petition.

He, therefore, urged the “honourable tribunal to dismiss the petition for failure of the petitioners to lead any evidence, let alone, credible evidence, to make out a prima facie case against Honourable Ngozi Okolie and Labour Party.”

However, following the formal adoption of written addressees, the three-man panel led by Justice Musa said that it had reserved judgment to a later date to be communicated to the contending parties through their respective counsel.