Are you waiting for the ruling on the matter that has sent several people into compulsory fasting, well the judges have reserved ruling till later in the day.
So those fasting should not break their fast yet, while those in APC are advised to have their regular meals as they may end up losing appetites after the eventual ruling in the evening.
For me, as the court pleases my lord.
Meanwhile, the PDP lawyers are pressing forward their case. “The petitioner alleged that no accreditation took place in the Akwa Ibom governorship elections, but the judgement of the appeal court had it that there was over voting.
It is illogical that over voting could be realise in an election where there was disenfranchisement.
They also alleged that there was no voting, yet they tendered ballot papers as exhibits.
Form EC8A(result sheets) used throughout the state was tendered by the petitioner yet he said there was no collation of results.
No explanation was given for this contradiction. That “No voting” was used by the tribunal to nullify elections in 18 local governments while the appeal court ruled that there was over voting and nullified the elections in the entire state, relying on the information gathered through the card reader.
The so called security reports alleging pockets of violence, were dumped at the tribunal and the makers of the exhibits were never invited to be cross examined in line with the Evidence Act.
They didn’t call witnesses polling unit by polling unit.
My lord from whichever way you look at it, they have failed and we urge their lordships to allow them to fail.”
- PDP counsel arguing for the Peoples Democratic Party at the supreme court.
“The card reader is a computer and pw48 tendered it as exhibit 317 yet he was not the maker and could not explain it’s workability. The attitude of the court is clear on this, that once the maker of a document is kept away from cross examination on his document, such a document should be kept away as it lacks value.
The court of Appeal refered to 448,307 As The Number Of Accredited Voters and used that to declare that there was over voting. It Did Not Refer In Its Judgement Were It Got That Figure. No one knows the source. It was the evidence of a pw49. The tribunal had rejected the evidence OF Pw49 and all the evidences tendered by him.while the evidences of pw 50, 51 and 52 (Umana’s witnesses)were rejected by the tribunal. The court of appeal overlooked the decision of the lower court. PW 49 did not prove that 448,307 represented the total number of accredited voters in the state. The court of appeal did a grave injustice to us by using a simple fraction of the total number of voters to nullify the result in the state. My lord please correct this injustice and uphold the result as announced by INEC”.
The Abia state case is on now. We are now airing for our judgement after the Abia matter.
Source:ANIEKEME FINBARR
No comments:
Post a Comment