Edit Content
Saturday, Sep 21, 2024
Edit Content
Reading: Ebonyi Bye-Election: PDP Candidate Alleges Tribunal Bias
- Advertisement -

Ebonyi Bye-Election: PDP Candidate Alleges Tribunal Bias

David Akinyemi
David Akinyemi 11 Views

Barrister Silas Ọnụ, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate for the Ebonyi South Senatorial bye-election on February 3, 2024, has accused the judges of the Election Petition Tribunal of bias.

In a petition addressed to the President of the Court of Appeal on April 29, 2024, Onu demanded the disbandment of the panel.

He is contesting the victory of Processor Anthony Okorie from the All Progressives Congress (APC), as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Onu specifically accused the three judges of the tribunal, namely Justice H.N. Kunaza, Justice Basset Nkanang, and Justice M. O. Agboola, of showing blatant disregard for justice.

On April 15, Onu filed a Motion on Notice requesting an order of Inspection of electoral material, particularly the BVAS.

Read Also: Bye-elections and reruns take place in 26 states, with a significant turnout of 4.6 million voters under the supervision of INEC

Although the motion was opposed by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, INEC, the first respondent, did not oppose it. Onu argued that the Tribunal has the power to grant such an application in the interest of justice, citing a recent Supreme Court decision.

He also pointed out that the BVAS was mentioned by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents in their respective replies to the Petition.

However, on April 27, 2024, the tribunal delivered its ruling on the application, dismissing it on the grounds that granting it would amount to amending the Petition.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

Onu strongly disagreed with this decision, describing it as an untruthful representation of the Respondents’ case.

He emphasized that such a stance should not be allowed to tarnish the already troubled reputation of the Nigerian Judiciary, particularly in election cases.

Onu further clarified that the tribunal’s claim that the petitioners did not plead BVAS in their petition is false.

Share This Article
- Advertisement -