This is certainly not the best of times for members of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in Akwa Ibom State. Though both parties have claimed victory in the recent ruling of the state election petition tribunal, they have also found a common ground to disagree.
For them, the judgment has not been far-reaching enough and did not meet their expectations in all its ramifications. This explains why the two parties are getting set for another round of legal fireworks that might likely end at the Supreme Court.
Many of them might have hoped that the tribunal’s judgment would bring to an end the long drawn legal tussle that began soon after Udom Emmanuel of the PDP was declared winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in the April 15 elections. Umana Okon Umana, a former secretary to the state government who contested the gubernatorial election on the ticket of APC, headed to the tribunal seeking to prove that there was no election in the state.
Due to the interest the case had generated, the tribunal had to move from Uyo, the state capital, to Abuja and all witnesses and those having any matter before the tribunal had to travel to Abuja. It was the first time a tribunal had to move from the state, though the PDP sought to stop its relocation, it was not successful.
After the written addresses from both parties were adopted, the tribunal delivered its judgment that has stirred controversy within the two camps. Many of the PDP supporters as well as APC supporters were confident that the tribunal would do justice to the case. But it seemed the PDP were more confident that they would have the upper hand given that another election petition tribunal had upheld the election of Godswill Akpabio as a senator representing Ikot Ekpene Senatorial District (Akwa Ibom North West).
But when the tribunal delivered its verdict, it left many confused as it did not make any “consequential” pronouncement leaving more questions unanswered.
For instance, unlike the ruling of similar tribunals in nearby states, notably Rivers and Delta, the Akwa Ibom election petition tribunal gave a verdict that left both the petitioner and the respondent searching for more answers. In Rivers State, for instance, the tribunal ordered a rerun of the elections in the entire state while in Delta State; it upheld the election of Governor Ifeanyi Okowa of the PDP against his rival of the Labour Party.
But in Akwa Ibom State, the tribunal in its ruling ordered a rerun in 18 out of the 31 local government areas of the state while affirming that elections in 13 local governments complied substantially with the provisions of the Electoral Act. It was one judgment that jolted the two parties. While the APC which had insisted that there was no election said it rejected the judgment, the PDP on its part said it was not satisfied with the ruling because it veered off the mark.
According to Uwemedimo Nwoko, attorney-general and commissioner for justice, the issue is that the concluding part of the judgment does not align with the beginning as the judgment came in two parts.
“It was flowing very well until the judge veered off towards the end to create discontent and dissatisfaction. Our principal contention is that the tribunal premised its decision on the evidence of about four witnesses to nullify elections across 18 local government areas.
“It has been established and has become elementary that election petition are proved unit by unit and ward by ward. This is the position of the Supreme Court and it has not been shifted.
Nwoko, a member of PDP legal team, noted that any allegation of non-compliance, allegations of corruption practice, allegations of violence or whatever allegations raised must be proved unit by unit and ward by ward, adding, “one allegation, or even proof of non-compliance or corrupt practices in one unit cannot help to establish the order.’’
He said the documentary evidence presented by the petitioners was absolutely in proof of the respondent’s case.
“The petitioner came to court originally and said that there was no election at all in Akwa Ibom State. From paragraph 60 of their petition, they said there was no election and somewhere along the line, they now added that there was election in some local government, wards and units.
Specifically, Nwoko pointed to the case of Ibesikpo Asutan where he said former Governor Victor Attah testified against the PDP.
According to him, the evidence of the former governor that the tribunal said was a witness of truth but his evidence was limited to his unit.
“The only thing he said was that he was driving, he saw people waving at him and he asked what the problem was, then the people shouted, ‘No election, no election’ and he did not stop and the tribunal now used that to nullify the election in the whole of Ibesikpo Asutan Local Government Area.”
But members of the APC after celebrating the ‘victory’ of the tribunal judgement on their part are saying that the verdict ought to have gone a step further to cancel the entire elections and order a rerun in all the 31 local governments and not only in 18 local government areas.
According to Victor Iyanam, a chieftain of the APC and former attorney general and commissioner of justice, the entire elections should have been cancelled and the tribunal should have made a substantive declaration on the fate of the governor.
However analysts say the tribunal could not have granted what the petitioners did not ask for. The APC though still celebrating its partial victory just like the PDP is heading to the appeal court. This was further confirmed by the APC governorship candidate who returned from Abuja to the state for first time during the week and was received by his supporters at a grand reception in Uyo.
“We are appealing because we are hopeful. We trust in God and know that the judiciary will give the people of Akwa Ibom State justice. I believe that at the Appeal Court we will succeed so that we can have 31 over 31 local government areas. I thank God because change is coming and I want to thank you for your resilience. You have gone through pains, you have sacrificed so much. It has not been easy,’’ Umana said.
Indeed, it remains to be seen which of the two parties would laugh last over the tribunal judgement as the next round of legal fireworks begins.
ANIEFIOK UDONQUAK
