The Rivers State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal has reserved judgment on a petition by the Governorship candidate of Accord Party (AP), Dumo Lulu-Briggs against the declaration of Siminalayi Fubara as governor of Rivers State in the 18 March governorship election in Rivers.

The three-member tribunal, headed by Justice Cletus Emifonye, gave the ruling on Wednesday following the adoption of final written addresses by the parties in the petition.

Cited as petitioners in the petition are Dumo Lulu-Briggs and his political party, Accord Party (AP). The governor of the Rivers state, Fubara, and nine others are respondents.

According to the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr. Fubara scored 302,614 votes to win the 18 March governorship election in Rivers, the votes the petitioners have challenged for not being a majority of lawful votes and held that the conduct of the election was in substantial non-compliance with the relevant laws.

The petitioners in adopting their final written addresses stated that the 18 March election was marred with substantial non-compliance with the relevant laws and unlawful votes credited to the Fubara.

In the submission of his final written addresses, counsel to the petitioners, A. J. Owonikoko ( SAN) told the court that the main issues challenged are complaints against the conduct of the election as well as the invalid return of election results, citing section 130 of the Electoral Act, 2022, stated that form EC 40 (G) 2 is a condition precedent for the return of winner in the governorship election, and that without it return is unlawful.

According to him, the form EC40(G)2 which stipulates the total number of units where votes were cast and not cast, is a necessary legal document that INEC must produce before the court, and if produced the burden of proof requested by the respondents becomes unnecessary.

The petitioners’ counsel further posited that the INEC deliberately concealed Form EC40(G)2 to hide their unlawful act of undue crediting of unlawful votes to the 1st respondent.

He therefore urged the court to nullify the INEC declaration of the 1st respondent for unlawful crediting of votes and substantial non-compliance with electoral laws.

However, the respondents’ counsel led by Emmanuel Ukaka ( SAN) urged the court to discountenance the arguments of the petitioners for inability to substantially prove their claims of irregularities.

The respondents in their submission through their various lawyers stated that most of the infractions complaints against by the petitioners were on manuals of the elections process but not infractions on the electoral acts, stressing further that the petitioners failed to link the documents in court with any of their specific complaints of non-compliance.

Steve Adehi (SAN) INEC’s counsel also aligned with other respondents that the burden of proof rests on the petitioners to prove their claims of irregularities.

Addressing journalists after the court proceedings, the 1st petitioner (Lulu-Briggs) stated that his pursuit of justice is to deepen democracy.

He expressed confidence that if the court orders a rerun he will get victory at the polls, stating that he approached court not for personal gains but for the benefits of voters that were largely de-enfranchised.

According to him, the legal battle is for further deepening of the democratic process in Nigeria for the good of ordinary Nigerians.
[ad unit=2]