OSUN TRIBUNAL UPDATE: 19/11/2014 WE WERE NOT DISENFRANCHISED - PDP WITNESSES Contrary to the claims of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate, Iyiola Omisore that many voters were disenfranchised and many were not accredited before voting on August 9 election in Osun State, more witnesses of the party have confirmed to the election petiton tribunal in Osogbo that they were accredited and voted on the said day. This is just as counsel to Omisore and the PDP, Chief Chris Uche (SAN) conceded that the purported report of the PDP polling agents were not specifically pleaded as part of the documents to be relied on before the court. This happened on Wednesday at the continued hearing of the petition filed by Omisore and the PDP against the re-election of Governor Rauf Aregbesola and the All Progressives Congress (APC). The witnesses were Kunle Hamzat from Osogbo local government and Tajudeen Badmus, Isola Wasiu and Babatunde Sikiru, all from Olorunda local government area of the state. They were all cross-examined by Aregbesola counsel, Mr Femi Falana (SAN); APC counsel, Mr Kemi Pinheiro (SAN) and INEC counsel, Mr Ayotunde Ogunleye. Hamzat in his evidence said he was accredited, voted after accreditation, at the polling unit he registered. He also admitted that being the PDP supervisor for his ward, all the PDP agents he supervised signed the result forms for their various units, just as he confirmed that he also signed the result form for his ward after collation. The witness, under cross-examination also said that other voters were also accredited on the said day, but the accreditation was not easy. He said, because the voting process was a secret ballot system, he did not know who each of the voters voted for. The witness who had claimed in his written deposition that the valid votes recorded for his unit were more than the ballot papers brought by the INEC officials on the election day, he was confronted with result form for his unit, which confirmed that valid votes for the units was 467, while the total votes recorded was also 467. While Tajudeen and Babatunde also told the court that they voted after accreditation, Isola said he also voted, but was not accredited. They said their agents signed the result forms for their units, while they (witnesses) also signed the result forms for their various wards. Inspite the restriction of movement and heavy security presence in the state during the election, Babatunde alleged the police on duty of drinking beer at a nearby beer parlour. In the course of cross-examination, the APC lawyers suspected that Babatunde was not the signatory to his acclaimed witness statement and gave him a piece of paper to append specimen of his signature, which was eventually found to be different from the one claimed on the written statement. Subsequently, the petitioners counsel objected to the tendering of the specimen on the ground that it was not frontloaded nor pleaded. After argument on the issue, the tribunal admitted it in evidence and reserve ruling on it till the judgement time. Earlier while leading Isola in evidence, the petitioner counsel sought to tender through the witness, the alleged written reports of PDP agents submitted to him. Falana opposed to the tendering of the documents on the ground that they were not frontloaded, pleaded or listed as part of the document to be relied on. Describing the documents as strange, he said they were not belong to the category of document upon which rulings have been reserved. Also, Pinheiro argued that the documents were not in the pleadings of the petitioners as stated in paragraph 143 and 144 of the petition. In his own, the INEC counsel submitted that the witness, not being the maker of the document could not have it tendered through him. In his reply on point of law, the petitioner counsel, Uche said he conceded that the documents were not specifically pleaded in the petition, but noted that they are relevant. He said since the ruling would be given at the final judgement, the tribunal should please accept the document conditionally. Ruling on the admissbility of the document was reserved till the judgement time, but it was marked as exhibit
Posted on: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 16:58:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015