The National and State House of Assembly Election Tribunal, sitting in Uyo, the Akwa Ibom State capital, on Wednesday, upheld the victory of Senator Christopher Ekpenyong as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in the February 23 elections.
He was authenticated as the Senator representing Akwa Ibom North-West Senatorial District at the Senate.
Akpabio, the 1st Petitioner had challenged the elections on the grounds that;
a) that Senator Christopher Ekpenyong was not duly elected by a majority of lawful votes cast at the February 23, 2019 elections for the Akwa Ibom North-West Senatorial District;
b) That the election that produced Senator Christopher Ekpeyong as the winner was invalid owing to non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act in the conduct of the elections.
It was also learnt that the court dismissed the petition of Senator Akpabio wherein the senator had claimed a declaration, inter alia:
1) That the return of the 1st Respondent was not duly returned or elected by a majority of lawful votes cast at the February elections at the February 23, 2019 elections;
2) that the result of the election held on the February 23, 2019 elections be nullified same being held, not in compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act and a re-run ordered thereto;
3) an order of court declaring the 1st Petitioner, Senator Godswill Akpabio as the winner of the elections having polled the highest number of valid, lawful votes at the elections.
Read also: Buratai, Fayemi disagree over security vote
The court dismissed all the preliminary objections filed by all the Respondents in the petition and resolved to settle the case on the merits, to wit:
a) Did the Petitioner prove by admissible evidence that the election was invalid?
b) Did the 1st Petitioner establish that he, Senator Godswill Akpabio won the elections by polling the highest number of votes cast at the elections against Senator Christopher Ekpenyong who was declared a winner by the INEC?
The court ruling on the burden of proof held that burden of proof for proving substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Act to ground a nullification of the election is on the petitioner and relying on the case of ANDREW v. INEC.
The court therefore held that the Petitioner’s evidence was too weak in all ramifications to prove non-compliance, not to mention substantial non-compliance, which is the only ground for nullification of the elections.
The court further stated that the petition failed to bring any witness from the polling units and thus could not prove substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Act.
The court in the end, in a majority Judgement of two justices, dismissed the petition and upheld the declaration of Senator Christopher Ekpenyong as the winner of the February 23, 2019 elections.
Join the conversation
SPECIAL REPORT: Displaced residents of Zamfara battle hunger, as underfunding derails Nigeria’s nutrition goals
On paper, Muhammad Zayyanu is seven years old. The quiet boy who looks shorter for his age could not recollect...
INVESTIGATION: N7.3bn paid for unnamed projects; how Nigerian govt spent N2.2trn in six months
Analysing nearly 3,000 payments made by various Federal Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) over the previous six months (January...
INVESTIGATION… Delay rocks Nigerian govt’s promise of N30,000 covid-19 relief for artisans, others
Before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in February, 2020, Chukwudi Okoroigwe’s daily earnings as a bus driver was hardly enough to cater to the...
INVESTIGATION… Ten years after, communities count losses as AfDB, Cross River govt abandon road project
Ten years after the Cross River State government and African Development Bank (AFDB) jointly awarded the Yahe-Wanokom-Wanikade-Benue border road for...
INVESTIGATION….N.3bn down the drain: Why water projects for Enugu communities don’t work
In this concluding part, ARINZE CHIJIOKE talks about some of the projects that are serving the people and how various WASH programmes have failed to tackle...