The Court of Appeal in Abuja has reserved its rulings on a series of appeals and a cross-appeal stemming from the contested Edo State governorship election held on September 21, 2024. The three-member panel, led by Justice M. A. Danjuma, announced the decision on Thursday following the adoption of final arguments by all involved parties. A date for the judgment will be communicated in due course.
At the heart of the legal battle is the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) was the victor. The appeals under consideration include a challenge filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Asue Ighodalo (Appeal No. CA/ABJ/EPT/ED/GOV/01/2025), as well as a cross-appeal lodged by the APC and Okpebholo (Appeal No. CA/ABJ/EPT/ED/GOV/04/2025).
Further appeals were brought by Action Alliance (AA) and its National Chairman, Rufai Omoaje (Appeal No. CA/ABJ/EPT/ED/GOV/02/2025), and Dr. Bright Enabulele and the Accord Party (Appeal No. CA/ABJ/EPT/ED/GOV/03/2025).
Lawyers for the appellants urged the court to overturn the decision of the election tribunal, delivered on April 2, which upheld Okpebholo’s victory. Conversely, legal representatives for the respondents argued for the dismissal of the appeals and the affirmation of the tribunal’s judgment.
Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), representing Okpebholo, argued that the PDP and Ighodalo had failed to provide sufficient evidence of electoral irregularities. He emphasized that even the appellants admitted that a deduction of the disputed votes would still leave Okpebholo and the APC with a majority.
Ikpeazu also addressed the issue of missing serial numbers on Form EC25B, clarifying that the form is intended to record quantities of materials received and returned, while serial numbers are properly documented on Form EC40A, which the appellants submitted at the tribunal.
Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), representing the APC, underscored the legal requirement for petitioners alleging non-compliance to present witnesses from each affected polling unit to substantiate their claims. He asserted that the PDP and Ighodalo fell short of this standard, having called only a limited number of polling unit agents compared to the number of units where complaints were raised.
Ukala also highlighted the appellants’ failure to produce Form EC25D, the form where ballot paper serial numbers are typically recorded, despite referencing it in their petition. Kanu Agabi (SAN), representing INEC, echoed the call for the appeals to be dismissed.
The Court of Appeal’s decision will have significant implications for the political landscape of Edo State, and all eyes are now on the court as it prepares to deliver its rulings.