OSUN STATE & TRIBUNAL UPDATE Day-by-day, the coast is becoming - TopicsExpress

OSUN STATE & TRIBUNAL UPDATE Day-by-day, the coast is becoming colourful. The governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in Osun State, Iyiola Omisore, has tendered certified true copies of a ruling of a Federal High Court, Osogbo, allegedly restraining the state Resident Electoral Commissioner, Amb Rufus Akeju, from conducting election in the state. The petitioner’s counsel, Chief Chris Uche (SAN), had sought to tender copies of the ruling before the three-man tribunal adjourned on Monday. The said court ruling, dated March 28, 2011, was delivered shortly before the 2011 general elections and the petitioner told the Justice Elizabeth Ikpejime-led tribunal that the ruling was binding on Akeju. The REC of Kogi State, Mr. Segun Agbaje, handled the Osun governorship election of August 9, the outcome of which is being contested by Omisore. Agbaje arrived Osun in July to conduct the poll. Counsel to the first respondent, (Governor Rauf Aregbesola), Mr. Segun Ajibola ( SAN), raised an objection to the admissibility of the document. Counsel to the All Progressives Congress, which is the second respondent, Mr. Kemi Pinheiro (SAN) also objected to the document. Pinheiro said the interlocutory ruling, which was delivered by the court in 2011, was irrelevant to the petition arising from the election conducted in 2014. He described as mischievous, the attempt to bring in the “irrelevant document” and this obviously annoyed Uche, who stood up to confront him. Omisore’s counsel asked the APC lawyer to withdraw the word “mischievous” but Pinheiro insisted he did not say anything wrong, saying he had nothing personal against Uche. He reminded the tribunal of an earlier comment where Uche said he ( Pinheiro) was parading “comedy of errors.” The tribunal chairman asked Pinheiro to withdraw the word. Counsel for INEC, Mr. Ayotunde Ogunleye, also objected to the admissibility of the document. He said that Agbaje conducted the August 9 governorship poll in Osun State, and not Akeju. The tribunal admitted the document in evidence and reserved ruling on its admissibility until the judgement stage. The Petitioner Witness 1, Mr. Bola Ajao, who was called by Omisore to prove his allegation of rigging, told the tribunal during cross examination at the resumed hearing on Tuesday that Akeju conducted the disputed election. Charles Edosomwan (SAN) represented Aregbesola on Tuesday while Yomi Aliyu was the APC’s lead counsel for the day. Ajao, who is the secretary of the PDP in the state, told the panel that INEC produced three separate voter registers for the disputed poll. But he could not produce a copy of the register when he was asked to do so by the counsel to the second respondent (APC) during cross-examination. The PW1 also told the tribunal that he did not have the list of members of the National Youth Service Corps and Osun Youth Empowerment Scheme cadets, who the petitioner claimed were used to rig the election in favour of Aregbesola. INEC’s counsel, Ogunleye, told the witness that Akeju did not conduct the disputed poll but Ajao said, “he (Akeju) did.” Ogunleye confronted the witness with a letter of redeployment of Akeju to resume as Osun REC and he sought to tender same. Both Edosomwan and Aliyu urged the tribunal to admit the document, which they said was relevant to the case. The petitioner’s counsel raised an objection to the document, saying even if it was a certified true copy, it could not be tendered from the bar because it was not front loaded and listed in the third respondent’s reply to the Omisore’s petition. He added that there was no nexus between the witness and the document. The tribunal admitted the document and reserved its ruling on admissibility until the judgment stage. The PW2, Kolapo Sikiru, ward supervisor of the PDP in Osogbo and PW3, Gbadebo Adeyemo, another ward supervisor in Osogbo, testified that the election was massively rigged. They, however, admitted that there was accreditation before voting and that they cast their votes. PW 3 told the tribunal that he was forced to sign exhibit 219 in order to save his life. But the first respondent’s counsel said that the witness did not state this in his witness statement on oath, which he had earlier adopted as his evidence before the panel.