Omisore and Aregbesola
The Election Petition Tribunal hearing matters
arising from the Osun State governorship election
held on August 9, 2014 has adjourned indefinitely
for judgement.
The chairman of the three man panel, Justice
Elizabeth Ikpejime, said on Friday after parties in
the case had adopted their final written
addresses.
The Peoples Democratic Party governorship
candidate, Senator Iyiola Omisore, urged the
tribunal to declare him the winner of the total
lawful votes cast during the poll and return him as
the governor.
Counsel to the petitioner, Dr. Alex Izinyon, while
adopting his written address and his reply to the
first, second and third respondents’ final
addresses, told the panel that Governor Rauf
Aregbesola had admitted in his written address
that he did not score up to 394,684 votes credited
to him by the Independent National Electoral
Commission, which was the basis on which INEC
declared him (Aregbesola) the winner of the poll.
Izinyon told the tribunal that the first respondent,
on pages 5 and 6 of his final address, admitted
that he scored 234,971 votes and not the number
of votes credited to him by the electoral
commission.
The counsel was silent on the number of votes
credited to Omisore by Aregbesola’s counsel but
the chairman of the panel supplied the number
(219,189).
The petitioner’s counsel said that having admitted
that the first respondent did not score up to
394,684 the tribunal should hold that the new
figure which they claimed was binding on them.
He stated further that the number of votes
allocated to Omisore in Aregbesola’s final address
was not binding on the petitioner while urging the
panel to uphold the old figure of 292,747 votes
credited to the PDP candidate by the INEC as his
authentic score.
He said that lawyers were the mouthpiece of their
clients in litigations and whatever they said
should be upheld.
He said, “We urge your lordships to allow this
petition and declare the petitioner as having the
lawful majority votes cast and be sworn in as the
governor of Osun State.
“Looking at pages 5 and 6 of the first respondent’s
written address, they have made it simple for the
tribunal. They admitted in the table they draw
that they scored 234,971 and not what the INEC
credited to them. This is an admission from the
first respondent. This is different from the votes
INEC gave to them.
“They have not come to the tribunal to say that
the votes credited to them by INEC are legitimate
and should be upheld. They have the right to
allocate vote to


Source: http://www.punchng.com/news/tribunal-reserves-ruling-on-osun-gov-election-petition/

Just watching

The least we expect is a re-run or they declare Omidsore the winner.

Observing

in Osun state, you will be suprised at the level of decadence going on in their educational sector. All Public school stûdents are required to wear the same school uniform all over the state. It does not promote the Spirit of competïtion which is well known to Spur school Students to perform better. Moreso, the school uniform is not available for Students, forcing them to wear tattered uniforms to schools. Some even wear different attires to school all in the name of "we can't get the material for the school uniform."

Again, Education is free but teachers are not paid salaries, education is free but schools are inadequately funded thereby leading to a some schools (most Public secondary schools) not writing last term's exams. You can confirm this from other source.

Propaganda seems to be the order of the day here. But the truth will soon be staring blankly at Aregbesola's face soon.

if this news is true then what is our hope as a country

Don't knw y PDP like deceiving themselves, even omisore knows he didn't win

so many things happening in this country of ours.

a cheat will always be a cheat

Nigerians are wonderful.

@ op u can lie o, where did u get ur k-leg info. May God have mercy on u

28-01-2015
Why Aregbesola Cannot Lose At The Tribunal – By
Olufemi Oyedele

After the August 9, 2014 gubernatorial election which was
convincingly won by Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, the All
Progressive Party (APC) candidate, the Returning Officer,
Professor Bamitale Omole, in returning Ogbeni Aregbesola, said
Aregbesola got 394,684 votes to win the election. His closest
contestant was People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate,
Senator Iyiola Omisore, who polled 292,747 votes to emerge
second. The candidate in the third position was Alhaji Fatai
Akinbade with 8,898 votes.
Professor Omole said “Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola of APC, having
satisfied the requirements of the law, and scored the highest
votes, is hereby declared the winner and is returned elected.
After the election results were declared, the PDP candidate
petitioned the Osun Election Tribunal claiming there were
irregularities in the election and its conduct. By Section 285 (6)
of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999, as amended in 2011, the
original judicial responsibility of handling and disposing within
180 days (6 months) from the date of filing of the petitions
(within twenty-one (21) days after the announcement of the
final result), of gubernatorial election is rested on the Election
Petition Tribunal (equivalent of High Court).
By Section 285 (7), an appeal from the decision of an Election
Tribunal or Court of Appeal in an election matter must be heard
and disposed of within 60 days (2 months) from the date of the
delivery of judgment of the Tribunal or Court of Appeal. Of all
the poll petitions’ cases, the governorship poll cases have the
longest duration of ten (10) months; that is to say six (6) months
at the tribunal, two (2) months at the appeal court and two
months at the Supreme Court.
From the above declarations of the 1999 constitution (as
amended in 2011), two cases emerged at the Osun Gubernatorial
Election Tribunal. One, is the case filed by the PDP and its
candidate, Iyiola Omisore, on the alleged irregularities in the
conduct of the election; and two, the case brought by APC and
its candidate on the lateness of the PDP and its candidate to file
their petitions legally. Legal filing must conform to the twenty-
one (21) days stipulated by the constitution. No match organizer
wants the contest to be won through ‘work over’. PDP and its
candidate were not responsive enough to file their petitions
within the stipulated time of twenty (21) days but the tribunal
gave them the chance to air the views on the conduct of the
election, anyway.
In the process of proving that there were irregularities in the
conduct of the August 9, 2014 gubernatorial election, PDP and
its candidate in the election were only able to show that there
should be higher penalty for “abuse of court process” and not
the N50,000.00 (fifty thousand naira) only fined the Labour
Party candidate, Niyi Owoade. The Osun Gubernatorial Election
Tribunal dismissed Accord Party’s petition in the August 9,
2014 election and a fine of N50,000.00. This fine may be
brought up to forestall future abuse of court process.
In the Osun Gubernatorial Election Tribunal that took place in
the Osogbo High Court premises, the legal team of PDP and
Iyiola Omisore turned the court into a cinema theatre and freely
entertained the tribunal judges and the whole court with their
comedy most of the times that the tribunal sat. In the beginning
of the petition, PDP and its candidate (the petitioners) claimed
that there were irregularities in all the wards in the state and
wanted to inspect the ballot papers to establish irregularities.
The tribunal struck out the application of PDP and its candidate
to take the entire petition together so as to fast track pre-
hearing.
The petitioners claimed they had 1200 witnesses at the
beginning of the tribunal sitting. This was later reduced to 500
out of which they were only able to invite 43. The witnesses
invited were not coherent in their submissions. The comedy of
the one-sided case was in the presentation of experts, evidences
and witnesses. The forensic expert procured by the petitioners
in the petition, Mr Pius Bakare, could not prove how he became
an expert in fingerprint analysis. This can only be done through
certificate or work-experience.
The witnesses were in court during the morning session of one
of the sittings, but in the afternoon session, when they were
expected to give evidence before the tribunal, none of them was
seen. When tribunal members resumed from the break at exactly
2:30 pm, the PDP legal team discovered that the witnesses have
left the court premises. Some members of the PDP legal team,
including Otunba Ojo Williams, quickly rushed out of the court
to call the witnesses back to the court. The lead counsel of the
petitioner, Mr Chris Uche (SAN), appealed profusely to the
court for the delay, as the witnesses were not on ground,
admitting that “this is not good for us at all”.
When the delay was becoming unbearable, the tribunal
Chairman, Elizabeth Ikpejeme, stood down the case, rose and
asked the petitioners’ counsel to inform them when they were
ready with their witness. It took about 15 minutes before the
legal team could get the witnesses back to court after several
appeals and assurances. After the witnesses were gotten back to
court, the tribunal resumed sitting and the petitioners resumed
calling of their witnesses. The witnesses intentionally varnished
because they were scared of what they would face from the
Aregbesola’s counsel having heard from witnesses who had
earlier given evidence.
In cross-examining the witnesses in the morning session on the
day the witnesses disappeared, a PDP witness from Oriade Local
Government Mr Oluwaseun Fapohunda, stunned the tribunal,
when during cross-examination said that Ogbeni Rauf
Aregbesola voted at his polling unit in Oriade Local
Government whereas Aregbesola voted in Ilesa in Ilesa East
Local Government Area. Mr Fapohunda who claimed he voted
in Unit 14, Ward 3, of Oriade Local Government was asked to
show the tribunal his allegation of over-voting which he
claimed was apparent in his witness statement on oath, failed to
do so even when he was obliged a reading glasses by the
petitioner’s counsel, Kunle Adegoke Esq. He also stated that he
did not have any pictures of canopies erected in each of the
polling units where APC members were winning and dinning.
For Mr. Adejare Moshood, he confessed during cross-
examination that he cannot see any super-imposition of any
result in Exhibit 192 and 207 which is the result tendered for all
the units and ward, contrary to paragraph 5 of his statement on
oath. When asked what he meant by super-imposition, he said
”when you see something bad and you complain about it and
nobody attends to it”.
Habeeb Trimisiyu Oluwafemi, supervisor in ward 4 Ayedaade
Local Government claimed he voted in unit 4. He claimed in his
witness statement on oath that agents of APC were busy
awarding votes arbitrarily to the Respondents. When he was
asked to mention the name of those agents, he said he does not
know them. He was further asked to point out the genuine votes
and the inflated votes as claimed in his witness statement on
oath which he said he cannot identify. He also testified to the
effect that when votes were counted in his unit or anywhere in
his ward he was not present and when it was being recorded he
was not in any unit.
It was also a bad day for an old man Rasaki Olawuni who
claimed to be a party agent in Unit 1, Ward 3, Ayedaade Local
Government. He stated in his witness statement on oath that
unregistered voters were allowed to vote, that PDP supporters
were chased away from the polling unit and others were
intimidated. During cross examination, he claimed he can
neither read nor write, but can see his name on the voters
register and no other. He also confirmed that he did not have the
voters card of those PDP members that were prevented from
voting neither did he have the names of PDP members that were
intimidated and harassed contrary to his affidavit sworn to.
He further stated that he was not allowed to sign the result sheet
and was not given a copy either. Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN then
asked him that since he did not signed the result and copy not
given to him, he will not know the result contained therein form
EC8A. He answered in the affirmative. Chief Olujinmi further
confronted him with paragraph 4 which alleged over-voting in
his statement on oath which he could not find answer to. The
last straw was the revelation by chief Akin Olujinmi SAN that
he was not the party agent at that unit; that it was Bolarinwa
Ebenezer whose name was sent by PDP and he was the one that
signed form EC8A. Contrary to his claim that he did not collect
copy of the result in his unit, he was shown the duplicate of the
result signed by Bolarinwa Ebenezer tendered by PDP counsel.
It is rather too absurd and inconceivable that a petitioner would
claim irregularities in 85 polling units of the 105 of a local
government area will call only 3 witnesses whose only evidence
is, in most cases, by proxy, or hearsay. These are clearly
inadmissible in law. As a Petitioner’s witness, by definition, you
ought to be the first-hand witness to the event in contention.
You are not supposed to present third party information. And
even then, calling 3 witnesses representing only 3 polling units
of the alleged 85 units Ikire in Irewole Local government, for
example, is nothing but ridicule and abuse of court process. The
picture painted above also represents what the Petitioner was
claiming in virtually all the other local governments contested.
From the above analysis done on a local government by local
government basis, it is crystal clear that out of 965 Polling Units
being challenged by the Petitioners, they only called evidence
in support of their petition in only 239 Polling Units with the
abandonment of 726 Polling Units pleaded in their petition.
Assuming, without conceding, that the Petitioners have led
credible evidence in all the 239 polling units (which is not the
case here), is that enough to sway the judgment in their favour?
239 Polling Units represent 7.94 per cent of the 3,010 polling
units contained in the State. This is definitely too insignificant
to upturn the result of the gubernatorial election held on August
9, 2014. To make matters worse, the Petitioners tendered Form
EC8A in respect of only 230 units which mean that even if their
claim succeeds in respect of the 239 Polling Units in which
evidence was led, the Tribunal can only rule in their favour in
respect of the said 230 Polling Units in which Form EC8A was
tendered. But they failed to prove allegations of wrongdoings in
all.
In his final submission on Friday, January 23, 2014, Chief Akin
Olujinmi, the lead counsel to the petitioner, proved that the
exercise was an effort in futility and urged the court to strike
out this case. He opined that even where the results of the 965
polls being challenged by the petitioners were cancelled,
Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola will still win in two-third of the local
governments in the state and still lead the petitioner by simple
majority. This means that Aregbesola will still ‘satisfy the
requirements of the law’ to be declared winner. The results of
all the 965 polls were not addressed in the court as only 230
units were addressed and evidenced even wrongly. These are
the premise to say that Ogbeni Aregbesola cannot lose this case.
Olufemi Oyedele sent this in from Osogbo, State of Osun.

lakesidepapa:
@ op u can lie o, where did u get ur k-leg info. May God have mercy on u

28-01-2015
Why Aregbesola Cannot Lose At The Tribunal – By
Olufemi Oyedele

After the August 9, 2014 gubernatorial election which was
convincingly won by Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, the All
Progressive Party (APC) candidate, the Returning Officer,
Professor Bamitale Omole, in returning Ogbeni Aregbesola, said
Aregbesola got 394,684 votes to win the election. His closest
contestant was People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate,
Senator Iyiola Omisore, who polled 292,747 votes to emerge
second. The candidate in the third position was Alhaji Fatai
Akinbade with 8,898 votes.
Professor Omole said “Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola of APC, having
satisfied the requirements of the law, and scored the highest
votes, is hereby declared the winner and is returned elected.
After the election results were declared, the PDP candidate
petitioned the Osun Election Tribunal claiming there were
irregularities in the election and its conduct. By Section 285 (6)
of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999, as amended in 2011, the
original judicial responsibility of handling and disposing within
180 days (6 months) from the date of filing of the petitions
(within twenty-one (21) days after the announcement of the
final result), of gubernatorial election is rested on the Election
Petition Tribunal (equivalent of High Court).
By Section 285 (7), an appeal from the decision of an Election
Tribunal or Court of Appeal in an election matter must be heard
and disposed of within 60 days (2 months) from the date of the
delivery of judgment of the Tribunal or Court of Appeal. Of all
the poll petitions’ cases, the governorship poll cases have the
longest duration of ten (10) months; that is to say six (6) months
at the tribunal, two (2) months at the appeal court and two
months at the Supreme Court.
From the above declarations of the 1999 constitution (as
amended in 2011), two cases emerged at the Osun Gubernatorial
Election Tribunal. One, is the case filed by the PDP and its
candidate, Iyiola Omisore, on the alleged irregularities in the
conduct of the election; and two, the case brought by APC and
its candidate on the lateness of the PDP and its candidate to file
their petitions legally. Legal filing must conform to the twenty-
one (21) days stipulated by the constitution. No match organizer
wants the contest to be won through ‘work over’. PDP and its
candidate were not responsive enough to file their petitions
within the stipulated time of twenty (21) days but the tribunal
gave them the chance to air the views on the conduct of the
election, anyway.
In the process of proving that there were irregularities in the
conduct of the August 9, 2014 gubernatorial election, PDP and
its candidate in the election were only able to show that there
should be higher penalty for “abuse of court process” and not
the N50,000.00 (fifty thousand naira) only fined the Labour
Party candidate, Niyi Owoade. The Osun Gubernatorial Election
Tribunal dismissed Accord Party’s petition in the August 9,
2014 election and a fine of N50,000.00. This fine may be
brought up to forestall future abuse of court process.
In the Osun Gubernatorial Election Tribunal that took place in
the Osogbo High Court premises, the legal team of PDP and
Iyiola Omisore turned the court into a cinema theatre and freely
entertained the tribunal judges and the whole court with their
comedy most of the times that the tribunal sat. In the beginning
of the petition, PDP and its candidate (the petitioners) claimed
that there were irregularities in all the wards in the state and
wanted to inspect the ballot papers to establish irregularities.
The tribunal struck out the application of PDP and its candidate
to take the entire petition together so as to fast track pre-
hearing.
The petitioners claimed they had 1200 witnesses at the
beginning of the tribunal sitting. This was later reduced to 500
out of which they were only able to invite 43. The witnesses
invited were not coherent in their submissions. The comedy of
the one-sided case was in the presentation of experts, evidences
and witnesses. The forensic expert procured by the petitioners
in the petition, Mr Pius Bakare, could not prove how he became
an expert in fingerprint analysis. This can only be done through
certificate or work-experience.
The witnesses were in court during the morning session of one
of the sittings, but in the afternoon session, when they were
expected to give evidence before the tribunal, none of them was
seen. When tribunal members resumed from the break at exactly
2:30 pm, the PDP legal team discovered that the witnesses have
left the court premises. Some members of the PDP legal team,
including Otunba Ojo Williams, quickly rushed out of the court
to call the witnesses back to the court. The lead counsel of the
petitioner, Mr Chris Uche (SAN), appealed profusely to the
court for the delay, as the witnesses were not on ground,
admitting that “this is not good for us at all”.
When the delay was becoming unbearable, the tribunal
Chairman, Elizabeth Ikpejeme, stood down the case, rose and
asked the petitioners’ counsel to inform them when they were
ready with their witness. It took about 15 minutes before the
legal team could get the witnesses back to court after several
appeals and assurances. After the witnesses were gotten back to
court, the tribunal resumed sitting and the petitioners resumed
calling of their witnesses. The witnesses intentionally varnished
because they were scared of what they would face from the
Aregbesola’s counsel having heard from witnesses who had
earlier given evidence.
In cross-examining the witnesses in the morning session on the
day the witnesses disappeared, a PDP witness from Oriade Local
Government Mr Oluwaseun Fapohunda, stunned the tribunal,
when during cross-examination said that Ogbeni Rauf
Aregbesola voted at his polling unit in Oriade Local
Government whereas Aregbesola voted in Ilesa in Ilesa East
Local Government Area. Mr Fapohunda who claimed he voted
in Unit 14, Ward 3, of Oriade Local Government was asked to
show the tribunal his allegation of over-voting which he
claimed was apparent in his witness statement on oath, failed to
do so even when he was obliged a reading glasses by the
petitioner’s counsel, Kunle Adegoke Esq. He also stated that he
did not have any pictures of canopies erected in each of the
polling units where APC members were winning and dinning.
For Mr. Adejare Moshood, he confessed during cross-
examination that he cannot see any super-imposition of any
result in Exhibit 192 and 207 which is the result tendered for all
the units and ward, contrary to paragraph 5 of his statement on
oath. When asked what he meant by super-imposition, he said
”when you see something bad and you complain about it and
nobody attends to it”.
Habeeb Trimisiyu Oluwafemi, supervisor in ward 4 Ayedaade
Local Government claimed he voted in unit 4. He claimed in his
witness statement on oath that agents of APC were busy
awarding votes arbitrarily to the Respondents. When he was
asked to mention the name of those agents, he said he does not
know them. He was further asked to point out the genuine votes
and the inflated votes as claimed in his witness statement on
oath which he said he cannot identify. He also testified to the
effect that when votes were counted in his unit or anywhere in
his ward he was not present and when it was being recorded he
was not in any unit.
It was also a bad day for an old man Rasaki Olawuni who
claimed to be a party agent in Unit 1, Ward 3, Ayedaade Local
Government. He stated in his witness statement on oath that
unregistered voters were allowed to vote, that PDP supporters
were chased away from the polling unit and others were
intimidated. During cross examination, he claimed he can
neither read nor write, but can see his name on the voters
register and no other. He also confirmed that he did not have the
voters card of those PDP members that were prevented from
voting neither did he have the names of PDP members that were
intimidated and harassed contrary to his affidavit sworn to.
He further stated that he was not allowed to sign the result sheet
and was not given a copy either. Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN then
asked him that since he did not signed the result and copy not
given to him, he will not know the result contained therein form
EC8A. He answered in the affirmative. Chief Olujinmi further
confronted him with paragraph 4 which alleged over-voting in
his statement on oath which he could not find answer to. The
last straw was the revelation by chief Akin Olujinmi SAN that
he was not the party agent at that unit; that it was Bolarinwa
Ebenezer whose name was sent by PDP and he was the one that
signed form EC8A. Contrary to his claim that he did not collect
copy of the result in his unit, he was shown the duplicate of the
result signed by Bolarinwa Ebenezer tendered by PDP counsel.
It is rather too absurd and inconceivable that a petitioner would
claim irregularities in 85 polling units of the 105 of a local
government area will call only 3 witnesses whose only evidence
is, in most cases, by proxy, or hearsay. These are clearly
inadmissible in law. As a Petitioner’s witness, by definition, you
ought to be the first-hand witness to the event in contention.
You are not supposed to present third party information. And
even then, calling 3 witnesses representing only 3 polling units
of the alleged 85 units Ikire in Irewole Local government, for
example, is nothing but ridicule and abuse of court process. The
picture painted above also represents what the Petitioner was
claiming in virtually all the other local governments contested.
From the above analysis done on a local government by local
government basis, it is crystal clear that out of 965 Polling Units
being challenged by the Petitioners, they only called evidence
in support of their petition in only 239 Polling Units with the
abandonment of 726 Polling Units pleaded in their petition.
Assuming, without conceding, that the Petitioners have led
credible evidence in all the 239 polling units (which is not the
case here), is that enough to sway the judgment in their favour?
239 Polling Units represent 7.94 per cent of the 3,010 polling
units contained in the State. This is definitely too insignificant
to upturn the result of the gubernatorial election held on August
9, 2014. To make matters worse, the Petitioners tendered Form
EC8A in respect of only 230 units which mean that even if their
claim succeeds in respect of the 239 Polling Units in which
evidence was led, the Tribunal can only rule in their favour in
respect of the said 230 Polling Units in which Form EC8A was
tendered. But they failed to prove allegations of wrongdoings in
all.
In his final submission on Friday, January 23, 2014, Chief Akin
Olujinmi, the lead counsel to the petitioner, proved that the
exercise was an effort in futility and urged the court to strike
out this case. He opined that even where the results of the 965
polls being challenged by the petitioners were cancelled,
Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola will still win in two-third of the local
governments in the state and still lead the petitioner by simple
majority. This means that Aregbesola will still ‘satisfy the
requirements of the law’ to be declared winner. The results of
all the 965 polls were not addressed in the court as only 230
units were addressed and evidenced even wrongly. These are
the premise to say that Ogbeni Aregbesola cannot lose this case.
Olufemi Oyedele sent this in from Osogbo, State of Osun.

. Why not leave them and let them continue to dciv demselves, Aregbe clearly won the election.no doubt

Interesting revelation