• Kashamu
The Court of Appeal sitting in Ibadan will on Tuesday (November 24) hear the appeal filed by Senator representing Ogun East Senatorial District, Senator Buruji Kashamu as well as the cross appeal filed by the All Progressive Congress (APC) Senatorial candidate in the April election, Adedapo Abiodun.
The National Elections Petitions Tribunal sitting in Ogun State had in its verdict on October 9 annulled the election of Buruji Kashamu and ordered a re-run election in 110 polling units within the next 90 days.
Dissatisfied, both Kashamu and Abiodun headed to the appellate court seeking various reliefs. Kashamu in his appeal is asking the court to set aside the judgement of the tribunal and hold that he is the winner of the election.
In the appeal filed by his lawyer, Kashamu is urging the court to declare the results announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the true reflection of the election.
Abiodun in his cross appeal filed by his team of lawyers headed by Yusuf Ali (SAN) is praying the court to allow the cross appeal and “nullify the election in all the afflicted and affected polling units where corrupt practices, irregularities and non-compliance were held proved by the Tribunal”.
Abiodun is also seeking for an order declaring him as the winner of the March 28 Ogun East Senatorial Election having polled the majority of the lawful votes cast after deducting the votes afflicted by corrupt practices, irregularities and non-compliance.
Besides, the cross appellant is praying the court in the alternative, to order that fresh election be conducted in all the polling units in which corrupt practices, irregularities and non compliance have been found in addition to the 110 polling units which results were nullified by the Tribunal.
Abiodun is also contending that the Tribunal ignored applicable judicial authorities that allows challenge to the competence of an originating process to be raised at any time and by whatever means.
Part of the decision of the election Tribunal complained about are: “That the learned Tribunal erred in law when it imposed a duty on the Petitioners/ Cross Appellants beyond that fixed by the law adding that ,the verdict of the tribunal had occasioned a grave miscarriage of Justice.
“The learned Judges of the Tribunal erred in law in refusing to strike out the 3rd and 4th Respondents’ reply which was not signed as required by law on the premises that the motion on notice challenging same was not filed in good time and that no extreme circumstances will assume to enable the court entertain the challenge at the stage it was raised”.
“The Honourable Tribunal erred in law in failing to attach the requisite weight to the duplicate original of the electoral documents tendered before it and admitted as Exhibits PES001 – 188 after having held that the duplicate copies constitute primary evidence of the original copy and therefore do not require certification to be admissible and that they could be tendered from the bar and thereby came to a conclusion which occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice on the cross appellant” “The Tribunal was in manifest error in limiting the use to which the documents tendered could be put to.
“The Tribunal erred in law when it refused to hold that the 1st Petitioner/ Cross-Appellant scored the majority lawful vote and ought to be returned as the winner of the election conducted on March 28, 2015; and accordingly came to a wrong conclusion on the point which occasioned a miscarriage of justice”.