Tribunal decides Gbajabiamila’s fate Sept. 28

Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila

The Lagos State National Assembly Election Petitions Tribunal has fixed September 28, 2015 to give judgment in a petition challenging the victory of the All Progressives Congress lawmaker representing Surulere Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives, Mr. Femi Gbajabiamila.

Gbajabiamila, who is now the Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, had been declared the winner of the March 28, 2015 poll by the Independent National Electoral Commission after polling 21, 715 votes.

But his victory is being challenged by the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the said election, Mr. Tony Ashikodi, who polled14, 550 votes.

Ashikodi alleged that the election was characterised by irregularities and a breach of the guidelines set out by INEC for the conduct of the election.

He is seeking to nullify Gbajabiamila’s victory. Also, he is seeking an order for the conduct of a fresh election, arguing that Gbajabiamila did not score the highest number of valid votes as declared by INEC.

The Justice C.U Anwuka-led tribunal adjourned for judgment on Wednesday after the counsel for the parties would have adopted their final written addresses and canvassed summary arguments.

Ashikodi’s counsel, Kalu Onuah, said the tribunal was bound to declare as null and void the declaration by INEC that Gbajabiamila won the election, in compliance with Section 53(2) of the Electoral Act, 2010 which mandated the nullification of any election where the number of votes cast exceeded the number of registered voters.

Onuah argued further that a situation where the result sheets were not signed and counter-signed by the agents of the candidates at the polling units should lead to the nullification of the result.

Opposing him, however, counsel for Gbajabiamila and the APC, Omotayo Olatunbosun and T.N Olaitan, respectively, said the petitioner’s counsel misconceived the law and misrepresented the facts.

The respondents’ counsel argued that none of the exhibits tendered by the petitioner and his party alluded to any of their claims that the election was fraught with irregularities.

They claimed that the petitioner only dumped documents at the doorstep of the tribunal without making any effort to call any witness to substantiate their claims.