By John Mayaki
Earthquakes are never delightful to their victims, and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) may soon be the latest witness to this tragic truth. I do not refer here to that natural phenomenon caused by tectonic plates’ interactions with one another. I refer to major events that have the potential to spell doom and cause unhappiness to those involved in them. For getting its hopes too high and wheedling itself into believing it actually won the Edo election of September 26, 2016, PDP may soon face an earthquake that could affect its foundations.
After losing the Edo gubernatorial election, the party and its candidate, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu or Pastor Andrew Ize-Iyamu, filed a petition challenging the declaration of Godwin Obaseki as governor at the Election Petition Tribunal. This petition was characterised by altered depositions and Biblical allegories.
Mr. Onyebuchi Ikpeazu, Mr. Wole Olanipekun and Chief Lateef Fagbemi, all Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN), who are counsels to the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respondents respectively, detonated the nuclear weapons that will set off this earthquake. Fagbemi told the 3-man tribunal led by Justice Ahmed Badamasi that assuming the prayers of the petitioners were considered, the odds would still favour Godwin Obaseki, the APC candidate.
He whipped the petitioners’ arguments that they had conducted a ballot recount and drawn tables illustrating their findings, to wit that they won the election and should accordingly be declared winners. A baffled Fagbemi wondered in what séance this recount occurred for it was not in the full glare and ken of the general public that it happened. He said: “They did not tell us which one belongs to which, but they have now come out to tell us that they have given us the figures. Assuming your Lordships are even prepared to take their figures, we still have won by as much as 58,696 votes, and you can find that in paragraph 7.1 (2) of our reply”.
He continued that even if the tribunal humoured the petitioners, the 58,696 votes by which the APC led the election would still have put PDP’s arguments to the sword.
To prove PDP’s petition as a stillborn idea further, he cited the case of Oyewole and Akande, submitting that unless a document was tendered as exhibit, the tribunal cannot make use of it.
Another case he cited was that of Wasa and Kara where the Supreme Court took the position that the document must be an exhibit tendered in the case, rounding off that the petitioners had not even disputed the spread, which was an important factor in the proceedings.
Meanwhile, the petitioners, perhaps overwhelmed, argued that the 1st respondent did not call evidence. Ikpeazu, himself a learned fellow who is ready to battle on all fronts, explicitly argued that the electoral body was not obliged to call evidence. He accompanied the argument with a citation of the case of Alhaji Adamu Maina Waziri versus Alhaji Ibrahim Gaidam and four others. The citation was fresh from the oven, being a judgement delivered on February 16, 2016.
After Fagbemi, Olanipekun referred the tribunal to paragraph 4.6, page 9 of the respondents’ reply, where they cited the case of Ucha and Elechi, and explained that they could not draw charts of their own volition and impose them on the court. The petitioners, on their part, argued that the allegations were directed at INEC, so only INEC could reply.
Olanipekun displayed no tolerance for this argument and asked why the petitioners joined all three respondents. He cited the case of Omisore and Aregbesola where the court called it trite law, noting that non-calling of evidence by INEC did not affect the case adversely in any way. By cross-examining the witnesses of the petitioner, he argued, the 1st respondent had given evidence and the witnesses of the respondents and appellants were evidence for the court.
The petitioners, in their petition, said the PDP candidate was Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu. The PDP candidate that appeared before the court and who co-wrote the petition was a man named Pastor Andrew Ize-Iyamu. Naturally, the respondents did not recognise him and voiced this. In defence, the petitioners’ counsel asked Chief Dan Orbih, Chairman of a faction of Edo State PDP, to stand up to identify the 1st petitioner – the man named Andrew.
Olanipekun cited a Supreme Court ruling that ‘Wild Gold Jewellery Limited’ is different from ‘Wild Gold Jewellery’ and that ‘Incorporated Gospel Holy Apostolic Church’ is different from Incorporated Holy Gospel Church’. Analysts predict that a Godwin Obaseki victory will seriously affect the fortunes of the PDP in Edo State. Not only the party, but also the man, Osagie or Andrew.
As Olanipekun surmised, “All is well that ends well. We leave the rest for your Lordships to compute.
Mayaki writes from Benin City