Dr. David Ombugadu of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), has rejected the recent Appeal Court judgement, and has headed to the Supreme Court to challenge last Thursday’s Appeal court verdict.

Ombugadu, who described the Appeal Court ruling as twist of justice, said he was hopeful the Apex Court will reaffirm the verdict of the Tribunal that declared him as winner.

David Ombugadu made this known while addressing his supporters at his resident shortly after the Appeal Court verdict.

Ombugadu appealed to his supporters to remain calm, noting that light will triumph over darkness as there is strong hope in the Supreme Court to return the mandate of the electoraate back to them.

He admonished residents not to take laws into their hands but use the moment to seek God’s intervention in prayers.

“As law abiding citizens, we must not take the laws into our hands when we have not even exhausted all the legal process to claim back our mandate.

“There were similar cases sometimes where tribunal judgement was nullified by an Appeal Court but was reclaimed at the Supreme Court.

The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja last Thursday, reversed the nullification of the election of Governor Abdullahi Sule of Nasarawa State.

The appellate court in a unanimous decision by a three-member panel of Justices, voided the verdict of the Nasarawa State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which sacked governor Sule of the All Progressives Congress, APC.

In the lead verdict that was delivered by Justice Uchechukwu Onuemenam, the court held that evidence before it established that the tribunal relied on legally inadmissible evidence to declare the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, David Ombugadu, as the valid winner of the governorship election that held in the state on March 18.

According to the appellate court, the tribunal wrongly relied on the evidence of eight of the witnesses that were produced by the PDP candidate, whose witnesses statements on oath were not front-loaded alongside the petition.

It stressed that Section 285(5) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, section 132(7) of the Electoral Act 2022 and Paragraphs 4(5) (6) and 14(2) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, every written statement on oath must be filed alongside the petition, within the statutorily allocated time.

“Where a trial court admitted and acted on an illegally inadmissible evidence, it is the duty of the appellate court to ensure that such illegally inadmissible evidences are expunged.

“A court of law is only allowed to act on legally admissible evidence. If documents are unlawfully allowed by a trial court, the appellate court is duty bound to exclude the documents and discountenance the evidence.”
The appellate court proceeded to strike out all the evidence and exhibits that were tendered before the tribunal by the eight witnesses.

It held that the evidence of 12 remaining witnesses that testified for the PDP candidate, were not sufficient to sustain the judgement of the tribunal.

More so, the appellate court held that the tribunal was in error, when it deducted a total of 1, 868 votes that were credited to governor Sule, on the premise that over-voting occured in four polling units.
It held that the tribunal was wrong in its decision, since the petitioners did not provide necessary documents needed to prove over-voting.

The court noted that Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines, and other electoral documents, were merely dumped on the tribunal without any of them demonstrated to show how the over-voting occured.

It faulted the tribunal for summarily dismissing the evidence of witnesses that testified for the APC candidate, describing the action as “perverse”, adding that none of the witnesses that were called by the PDP and its candidate, gave valid evidence that the tribunal could have acted on.

It held that the tribunal acted wrongly when it recomputed votes and made the declaration that returned the PDP candidate as winner of the election.

Reacting earlier however, J S Okutrpa (SAN), who was among the team of Lawyers to Ombugadu, stated that when the fruits of the seeds of injustice being planted in judgments by Nigerian courts in aid of electoral frauds germinate sooner or later, all those who planted the seeds in judgments may not escape the calamiteous end of our democracy.

“To hold that subpoenaed witnesses cannot testify in election petitions either orally or by written form is indeed a recipe for anarchy and destruction of Nigerian democracy.

“The institution that has responsibility to aid justice cannot continue to mount judicial road blocks for attaining that justice on the arid altar of technicality.

“Stolen evidence we are told is admissible. Electoral Act 2022 makes Evidence Act applicable in the hearing and determination of election petitions.

“Subpoena is one of the ways to get evidence under the Evidence Act. What a country of absurdities.
Then no need to seek justice in court.

“INEC does not release documents before election petitions are filed. Justice is being slaughtered on the altar of undue legal technicality in our electoral jurisprudence.

Meanwhile, mild protest broke out in Nasarawa Eggon local government following the Appeal Court judgement but was brought under control with the presence of military personnel. The state has relatively remained calm.