LAGOS GUBER POLLS: APPELLATE COURT RESERVES JUDGEMENT IN APPEAL BY RHODES-VIVOUR, JANDOR
Read Time:3 Minute, 56 Second
In two separate appeals filed by Gbadebo-Rhodes Vivour, the governorship candidate of the Labour Party in Lagos State, and Azeez Adediran, the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, contesting the March 18, 2023, governorship election, the State and National Appeal Court sitting in Lagos on Tuesday reserved judgement.
On September 25, 2023, the Election Petitions Tribunal affirmed that Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu and his running mate, Obafemi Hamzat, were the legitimate winners of the state’s election.
The Peoples Democratic Party and Olajide Adediran, their candidate for governor, as well as the Labour Party and Rhodes-Vivour, their candidate for governor, had both submitted two petitions, which the Tribunal unanimously dismissed.
After hearing arguments from the parties, the lead justice of the three-person panel, chaired by Justice Yargata Nimpar, reserved the verdict at the hearing of the two appeals on Tuesday.
Justice Paul Bassi and Justice Samuel Bola are the other justices on the panel.
The Justices declared that the parties involved in the appeals would be informed of the judgement date.
All Progressives Congress, Governor Obafemi Hamzat and his deputy, and the Independent National Electoral Commission are the respondents in this appeal.
Prior to this, Olagbade Benson, the principal attorney for the Labour Party, pleaded with the court to accept the appeal, overturn the Tribunal’s ruling, and award the requested reliefs.
He asked the court to interpret the Constitution’s Section 182(1)(a) and how it relates to the qualifications of the second and third respondents.
On October 7, 2023, Gbadebo-Rhodes Vivour filed a Notice of Appeal with 21 grounds, contesting the State Governorship Tribunal’s ruling that supported Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu’s return.
The appeal claimed, among other things, that the Tribunal had made a legal error in concluding that the appellant bears the burden of proving both the particular oath of loyalty taken by the third respondent and the documentation of his renunciation of citizenship.
Additionally, it said that despite discovering that Hamzat is a naturalised citizen of the United States of America who has sworn allegiance to the nation, the Tribunal declined to declare Sanwo-Olu and his deputy ineligible.
The third respondent freely obtained US citizenship and made a declaration of allegiance to the US, according to the appellant’s main contention.
Benson contended that the 1999 Constitution’s Section 177 specifies that the only candidates eligible to run for governor or deputy governor of a state are those who were born citizens of Nigeria.
Wole Olanipekun (SAN), the lawyer for the second and third respondents, urged the court to dismiss the appeal in his response.
He contended that the dual citizenship aruged by the appeallant was never presented before the Tribunal.
“They are now presenting a case of dual citizenship, they believe that this is a trial court.
“The tribunal found out that the purported oath of allegiance to a foreign country was not before it so it ruled it out.
“We urge your Lordship to dismiss this appeal,” he said.
Azeez Adediran, also known as Jandor, the Peoples Democratic Party’s candidate for governor, submitted 34 grounds of appeal against the tribunal’s ruling declaring Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu the election’s victor.
Adediran voiced his displeasure with the lower court’s decision in the October 13, 2023, appeal, calling it a miscarriage of justice.
He requested that the tribunal’s decision be overturned by the Court of Appeal.
He claimed that when the Tribunal rejected his petition to contest Sanwo-Olu’s eligibility as the election’s victor, it committed a legal error and came to the incorrect judgement.
The appellant also took issue with the tribunal’s decision to exclude Gbedebo Rhodes-Vivour from his petition, arguing that since he had also claimed that Rhodes-Vivour’s sponsorship was void, the panel ought to have disqualified him from consideration.
But Jandor pleaded with the Court of Appeal to grant his requests, dismissing the candidates of the APC and LP and declaring their votes to be wasted.
Mr. Bode Olanipekun (SAN), the appellants’ response counsel, stated that the reliefs the appellants are seeking are so great that their petition must be successful, not the respondent’s weak defence.
He maintained that the respondents were not given the burden of proving any facts and that the appellants had not proven anything before the lower tribunal.
“In the instant case, the petitioner tendered the alleged false document (Exhibit P36) from the bar, the petitioners could not produce before the Court the Original document from which exhibit P36 was counterfeit.
“It is trite law that where oral evidence and documentary evidence tendered by a party in proof of a fact says different, that party cannot be said to have led credible and cogent evidence in proof of that fact,” Olanipekun said.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0