Ondo Election Tribunal upholds Gov Aiyedatiwa’s victory

Keep up with the latest news and be part of our weekly giveaways and airtime sharing; follow our WhatsApp channel for more updates. Click to Follow us

All petitions contesting the governorship election that Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa won on November 16, 2024, have been rejected by the Ondo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which is located in Akure, the state capital.

The three-member panel, which was chaired by Justice Benson Ogubu, ruled that five opposition parties—the Action Alliance (AA), Allied People’s Movement (APM), Social Democratic Party (SDP), African Democratic Congress (ADC), and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)—were worthless and without merit.

The tribunal ruled in its eight-hour ruling on Wednesday night that the petitions challenging Aiyedatiwa and his deputy’s victory were without merit and were thus dismissed.

Alfred Agboola Ajayi, the PDP candidate, has contested Aiyedatiwa’s deputy’s qualifications, claiming he falsified the West African Examinations Council, WAEC, certificate that was submitted to INEC.

The petitioners claimed that the APC ticket should have been deemed unlawful due to the three distinct names that appeared, which would have affected the governor’s victory.

The PDP further claimed significant violations of Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022, arguing that Form EC25B was improperly filled out in 3,834 polling places (97 percent of the state’s 3,933 polling places).

Because the issue had already been adjudicated by the Federal High Court, the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court, the tribunal excluded the features of certificate forgery from the petition when it delivered its ruling.

The tribunal asserts that the court’s rulings on the subject bind the parties.

The tribunal determined that the petitioner’s referenced Form EC25B never required the entry of serial numbers. It stated that the number of documents is what is required. It stated that the court would never tamper with documents that the petitioner had not recognized and produced.

Since none of the witnesses produced the BVAS machines or any supporting documentation required to support the allegation, the tribunal similarly rejected charges of over-voting and concluded that the petitioners had not proven the allegation.

Please don’t forget to “Allow the notification” so you will be the first to get our gist when we publish it. 
Drop your comment in the section below, and don’t forget to share the post.