The Ondo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Akure, the state capital, has dismissed all petitions challenging the 16 November 2024 governorship election won by Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa.
Five opposition parties—Action Alliance, AA; Allied People’s Movement, APM; Social Democratic Party, SDP; African Democratic Congress, ADC; and the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP—were declared worthless and baseless by the three-member panel led by Justice Benson Ogubu.
In the over eight hours of judgment delivered on Wednesday evening, the tribunal held that the petitions against the victory of Aiyedatiwa and his deputy were baseless and were accordingly dismissed.
The candidate of the PDP, Alfred Agboola Ajayi, had challenged the qualification of Aiyedatiwa’s deputy, alleging he forged the West African Examinations Council, WAEC, certificate submitted to INEC.
They cited inconsistencies with three different names appearing, with the petitioners arguing that it ought to have invalidated the APC ticket, consequently affecting the governor’s victory.
PDP, which also alleged widespread violation of Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022, contended that in 3,834 polling units (97 per cent of the state’s 3,933 units), Form EC25B was not properly completed.
While delivering the judgment, the tribunal expunged the aspects of certificate forgery from the petition on the grounds that the case had been decided at the Federal High Court, Appeal, and the Supreme Court.
According to the tribunal, the parties are bound by the decisions of the court on the matter.
The tribunal added that the allegations of non-qualification should be uprooted and distilled from the election petition since it was a pre-election matter.
The tribunal held that Form EC25B referred to by the petitioner, never prescribed the entering of serial numbers. It said what is necessary is the quantity of the papers. It said there was no way the court would dabble in documents that were not identified and demonstrated by the petitioner.
The tribunal also dismissed claims of over-voting as it ruled that the petitioners failed to prove the allegation, as none of the witnesses tendered the BVAS machines or related data necessary to substantiate the claim.
