Friday, 19th April 2024
To guardian.ng
Search
News  

Tribunal orders fresh guber poll in 18 A’Ibom councils

By Joseph Onyekwere
22 October 2015   |   4:51 am
The Akwa Ibom State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja yesterday ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to conduct fresh governorship election in 18 out of the 31 local government areas of the state.

INECThe Akwa Ibom State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja yesterday ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to conduct fresh governorship election in 18 out of the 31 local government areas of the state.

The tribunal nullified results in the 18 local government areas as a result of disenfranchisement of registered voters.

The Justice Sadiq Umar-led panel, in its judgment, which took it seven hours to deliver yeterday, held that 566,534 registered voters were disenfranchised in the 18 local councils including Uyo, the state capital, during the April 11 governorship election.

It also held that the petition filed by Okon Umana of the All Progressives Congress (APC) ‎ challenging the declaration of Udom Emmanuel of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as the winner of the April 11, 2015, succeeded in part, as the petitioners were able to establish that election did not hold in some local councils including Oruk, Uruan, Ibenu,  Ibono- Ibom, Nsit Ibom, Nsit Ubium, Ini, Oron, Nsit Atai, Etinan, Udung Oko and Eket are among the local government areas in which fresh elections were ordered to be conducted.

The tribunal did not however specify the period within which the election in the affected local governments must be conducted.

It held that the petitioners were able to establish that elections did not hold in the local government areas and that where there were attempts to conduct the poll, it was marred by irregularities, such as over voting, ballot box snatching and intimidation of voters.

It however rejected the evidence led by the petitioners with respect to the rest of the local councils on the grounds that the witnesses were not witnesses of truth.

The Tribunal also rejected the testimony of the petitioners’ expert witness because  the so-called expert witnesses did not show how they came about their findings on their claim that the election did not hold in the state.

0 Comments