The Rivers State governorship election
held on April 11, 2015 was a sham and mockery of democracy, the
Independent National Electoral Commission told the Rivers State
Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja on Friday.
The commission said the poll was marred with violence and all kinds of malpractices.
INEC is the first respondent to the petition filed by the All Progressives Congress and its candidate, Dr. Dakuku Peterside.
Other respondents are Governor Nyesom
Wike of the Peoples Democratic Party, whose declaration as the winner of
the poll, is being challenged by the petitioners.
INEC’s
representative, Charles Okoye, who heads the Election and Party
Monitoring Department of the commission in Rivers State, appeared before
the Justice Mohammed Ambrosa-led tribunal on Friday on subpoena,
testifying that the election was conducted in an atmosphere of warfare
and “militant terrorism.”
The witness, who said he monitored the
April 11 election alongside three national commissioners, also told the
tribunal that the poll was characterised by large scale violence.
Okoye, who was led in evidence by the
petitioners’ lawyer, Chief Akin Olujinmi, said apart from sending
various teams to 19 local government areas of the state, he, along with
three national commissioners of the commission, visited eight local
government areas on the day of the election.
The report of the monitoring exercise,
which Okoye said was co-signed by him and the three other national
commissioners, was tendered and admitted by the tribunal as Exhibit A2.
The counsel for the respondents
comprising INEC, Wike and PDP, said they would object to the report at
the stage of final addresses because it was not front-loaded with the
petition.
Okoye debunked allegation by INEC’s
lawyer, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, during cross-examination that the report of
the monitoring exercise was his private document.
When challenged by the INEC lawyer that
he did not witness any scenario where snatching of electoral materials
took place, the witness said, “In Khana, seven officers returned to the
INEC office to report that their electoral materials had been hijacked.”
During cross-examination by PDP’s
lawyer, Mr. Ifedayo Adedipe, the witness alleged that the security
officers deployed for election duties were compromised because
“militants seized a number of local government areas and the security
officers moved away without confronting them.”
The witness also debunked the allegation
by Ukala that he by-passed the state Resident Electoral Commission to
submit his report to the national office of INEC because it was cooked
up.
Meanwhile, five army officers had
appeared before the tribunal on the strength of a subpoena on the Chief
of Army Staff, Maj.-Gen. Tukur Buratai, had attested to the fact that
there was widespread snatching of electoral materials in the five local
governments they patrolled.
Okoye, with two operatives of the
Department of State Services, who also testified that election did not
hold in parts of the state which they patrolled on April 11, brought to
42 the number of witnesses so far called by the petitioners to prove
their case.
Before Okoye went deeply into his
testimony on Friday, INEC’s lawyer, Ikpeazu led the lawyers to the two
other respondents –Ukala (for Wike) and Adedipe (for PDP) – to oppose
the witness giving oral evidence.
Ikpeazu, whose opposition was dismissed
by the tribunal, had argued that he was not aware that the witness was
coming to testify and that an electoral officer or any officer of the
commission was duty bound to defend an election petition.
The lawyer said in any situation where
there was reason for the officer not to defend, then the officer shall
seek a written consent of the Attorney-General of the Federation.
But the tribunal dismissed Ikpeazu’s objection.
0 comments:
Post a Comment