The 2024 Ondo State Election Petition Tribunal has upheld the election of Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa of the APC as validly elected governor of the state.
Subsequently the Tribunal dismissed the petitions filed by the PDP and its Governorship candidate, Hon. Agboola Ajayi, for lacking in merit, while the court also dismissed the petitions filed by the Allied People’s Movement (APM) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP) challenging the victory of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa in the November 16, 2024 governorship election in Ondo State.
The Tribunal said Agboola failed to prove the case of academic certificate forgery against the Aiyedatiwa’s running mate, Olayide Adelami while he also failed to prove the case of over voting during the election.
The Tribunal uprooted the petition by the PDP candidate and described it as a failure.
…..Tribunal Dismisses APM, SDP, AA Petitions Against Aiyedatiwa, APC
The Election Petition Tribunal has dismissed the petitions filed by the Allied People’s Movement (APM) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP) challenging the victory of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa in the November 16, 2024 governorship election in Ondo State, describing the petitions as useless and meaningless journey.
Governor Aiyedatiwa, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and the All Progressives Congress (APC) were all listed as respondents in the cases brought by the APM and SDP candidates, including Otunba Bamidele Akingboye.
The Tribunal, in its ruling on the APM’s petition, found that the case lacked material facts and was not supported by credible evidence.
Justice Benson Ogubu, who read the lead judgment, stated that the allegations of voting without accreditation, over-voting, corrupt practices, and substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Act were not backed by any verifiable facts.
The panel further held that the evidence presented was of no probative value, and the written statement of the APM’s witness should be discountenanced for failing to disclose the source of information. Justices Daurabu Sikkam and Imelda Etiape concurred with the ruling.
The Tribunal concluded that the APM’s petition lacked merit and that the petitioner was not entitled to any of the reliefs sought.
The case was subsequently dismissed with an order for parties to bear their respective costs.
Similarly, the Tribunal dismissed the petition filed by the SDP, represented by its counsel Prince Adewole Adebayo, who alleged discrepancies in vote entries in Form EC8A, over-voting, and non-compliance with the Electoral Act. Responding, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, counsel to the respondents, urged the Tribunal to dismiss the petition for lacking substance.
In its judgment, the Tribunal ruled that the SDP’s case lacked merit and failed to provide the required material facts. It said the petition was based on speculation and not supported by concrete evidence, emphasizing that reliefs cannot be granted on the basis of hearsay, propaganda, or emotions.
The Tribunal dismissed the SDP’s petition as baseless and a waste of judicial time, also directing that each party should bear their own costs.
Tribunal Dismisses AA’s Petition Against Aiyedatiwa’s Victory
The Election Petition Tribunal sitting on the outcome of the November 16 governorship election in Ondo State has dismissed the petition filed by the Action Alliance (AA) challenging the victory of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and the All Progressives Congress (APC).
In a unanimous ruling, the Tribunal held that the AA lacked the locus standi to challenge the election outcome, having failed to present a candidate in the poll.
The AA and its National Chairman, Mr. Adekunle Rufai Omoaje, through their counsel, had alleged irregularities in the election and accused INEC of deliberately excluding the party’s name and logo from the ballot papers.
However, in the lead judgment delivered by Justice Imelda Etiape and supported by Justices Daurabu Sikkam and Benson Ogubu, the Tribunal declared the petition a nullity due to AA’s failure to field a candidate.
The Tribunal further held that the claim of unlawful exclusion is no longer a valid ground for challenging election results, as that provision was repealed with the enactment of the 2010 Electoral Act.
On the allegations of corrupt practices and vote buying, the Tribunal noted that while such claims are serious and punishable under the Electoral Act, the petitioners failed to provide credible evidence to substantiate them, rendering the petition legally unsustainable.
The Tribunal consequently dismissed the petition but declined to award costs against the petitioners.
