 |
Jos North/ Bassa Fed. Constituency:
INEC staff tells Tribunal how Hon. Maitala won election as parties are given 11
days to adopt final written addresses.
By Joseph A. Adudu
August 17, 2019
The head of
operation and Logistics with the Independent Electoral Commission ( INEC),
Yagba Shizaor Kundu, on Friday, told the Justice T.N Ezeugwu led panel of the
state and National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal sitting at the High
Court 8, West of Mines Jos that Hon. Haruna Maitala actually won the election
into the Jos North/ Bassa Federal Constituency in the election that was
conducted in February and March, 2019.
Kundu who was in
court on subpoena, equally identified all INEC documents that were used during
the said election and were already before the tribunal as exhibits.
Hon. Jonathan
Dabo and the Peoples Democratic Party ( PDP) who are the 1st and 2nd
petitioners challenging the election of Hon. Haruna Maitala of the All Progressive
Congress (APC) also the 2nd and 3rd respondents respectively. The petitioners
had already opened, called witnesses and closed their case. When the case file
was called on Friday, counsel to 2nd respondent, Garba Pwul ( SAN ), told the
tribunal " we are ready to open our defence. We have a witness from the
3rd respondent who is in court". The witness confirmed he was on subpoena
and produced a copy of the subpoena which counsel for 2nd respondent applied to
tender. With no objection from counsels to the petitioners, 1st and 3rd
respondents, the document tendered was admitted in evidence and marked as
exhibit R73.
Leading in
evidence in chief, the witness identified the following INEC documents already
before the tribunal as exhibits: Exhibits R- R61, ( being the results for the
re- run election held on 9 March, 2019 in all the Polling Units in Tudun Wada/
Kabong Ward; Exhibits R62 and R62a - R65 and R65a ( Form EC8b, which is the
results for the Ward): Exhibits R66 and R66a ( the collated results for Jos
North/ Bassa Federal Constituency for the election of 23 February, 2019);
Exhibits 67 and 67a, ( collated results following the re- run election on 9
March, 2019 for Jos North/ Bassa Federal Constituency); Exhibits 68 and 68a, (
Form EC8d which is the final collation result following the re- run election of
9 March, 2019); Exhibits R69 ( Form EC8e ( which is the final declaration for
the House of Representatives, Jos North/ Bassa); Exhibit R71, ( which is
INEC Manual for Election official 2019); Exhibit R72, ( INEC regulations and
Guidelines for the elections).
 |
| Garba Pwul SAN counsel for 2nd respondent |
Under cross
examination from OU Heavens, counsel for the 3rd respondents, witness told the
tribunal that the reason why February 23 election into House of Representatives
Jos North/ Bassa was canceled in Tudun Wada/ Kabong Ward was because INEC
collation officer could not sight Forms EC8a series, particularly, Form EC8a2.
He however said that in the re- run election that was held on 9 March, 2019,
Forms EC8a2 series were sighted, which is Exhibits R- R61 ( polling units
results). Witness added that there was no winner returned for the election held
on February 23, 2019 but that after the election of 9 March, 2019, a winner was
returned who is the 2nd respondent,( Hon. Haruna Maitala).
Witness said that
according to the Electoral Guidelines, if form EC8a2 is not found, an election
cannot be declared, “because Form EC8a2 was not submitted, we could not declare
any result for the election of 23 February, 2019", said witness.
While responding
to counsel for the 3rd respondent, Leo Ebi, witness confirmed to the tribunal
that INEC was not in custody of the original Polling Units result sheets for
the election of 23 February, 2019 for Tudun Wada/ Kabong because it never laid
hands on the results. He further stressed that for the purpose of collation of
results, INEC does not make use of duplicate results but original copies except
in a case where the election result was re- generated. He however stated that
for the February 23, election House of Representatives, particularly Tudun
Wada/ Kabong, no regenerated result was done.
 |
| Oyawale and Joshua John counsels for the petitioners |
Speaking under
cross examination from the counsel for the petitioners, Sunday Oyawale, witness
said that as the head of operations and Logistics of the 1st respondent, he was
familiar with electoral materials particularly result sheets. He said that INEC
result sheet bears the following features; Logo of the commission, the name of
INEC boldly written, the state where the result sheet is to be used, the serial
number of the result sheet, the type of election for which is to be used and
alphabetical and numerical numbers. He said that the sheet must have columns
for making entries (recording of votes) adding that the result sheet must have
a space for writing the name of the officer filling the sheet. “It must also
have provisions for signature, date and stamp", said the witness.
According to him, the result sheet for all categories of elections are printed
in original and duplicates so that entries from the original can be reflected
on the duplicates which are given to polling unit agents of political parties
that took part in the election and security agents. Speaking further witness
said, Exhibit R71 and R72 were designed to regulate the conduct of electoral
process. Asked whether Exhibits R71 and R72 gives the power to Local Government
collation officer to cancel election, witness responded thus, " what I do
know is that the Presiding Officer has the power to cancel election at the
polling unit and other collation officers also have the power to cancel
election".
With this
witness, the 2nd respondent closed his defence. According to counsel for 2nd
respondent, “my Lords, the last witness has performed satisfactorily, so we
will not call another witness. On this note, we apply to close our
defence".
With this
development, the 3rd respondent opened its defence and called two witnesses and
also closed its defence. According to counsel to 3rd respondent, " my
Lords, our first witness is Philip Asanato Adik". The witness said he was
a part-time lecturer with the Plateau state Polytechnic, Barkin Ladi. He made a
statement on oath before the Registry of the court on 23 April, 2019. Witness
said he was an agent of the 3rd respondent at the local government collation
centre. During cross examination from counsels to 1st and 2nd respondents, he
said he stood by certain paragraphs of his deposition in his witness statement
on oath that the collation of results at the local government collation centre
was suspended. When asked why collation was suspended, witness said
because the result brought at the collation Local government collation centre
was not accompanied with results from polling units of Tudun Wada/ Kabong Ward.
He said he raised objection to the collation of the results. " I raised an
objection at the point of collation to the collation of result from Tudun Wada/
Kabong Ward. The reason for my objection was because the result as contained in
form EC8b2 was not accompanied by the polling unit results for Tudun Wada/
Kabong Ward. The objection I raised was resolved by asking that we should come
back the next day to look into the issues I raised at the level of collation.
The next day, the issues were resolved by the cancellation of the result
collated into form EC8C2. Witness further stood by paragraph 22 of his
adopted statement that indeed, a re- run election was conducted and the results
collated. Witness also confirmed to the tribunal that the results in column 13
of exhibit 14 were all collated the same day. He added that the cancellation on
the exhibit was done before agents of various political parties including that
of the PDP who participated in the election signed and duplicate copies of the
exhibit were distributed to all agents including that of the 2nd petitioner.
Witness said that it was therefore, not true the evidence of PW 59 that he
had signed and left the collation centre before the cancellation.
Under cross
examination from counsel for the petitioners, witness agreed he was not an
agent of any of the 65 polling units in Tudun Wada/ Kabong Ward because he was
a Local government collation agent for his party (APC). He however stood by
paragraph 10 of his adopted statement that his agent informed him there was no
collation as the presiding Officer did not collated results for polling units.
Counsel applied
for Exhibits P122a, P122b and P122c and asked the witness to identity, but
said, “they are not known to me". Consequently, the tribunal told counsel
not asks the witness any question on the document since witness could not
identify it.
 |
| A cross section of counsels at tribunal on Friday |
The 2nd witness,
Yusha'a Muhammad Mazadu is a public servant and lives at Race Course Jos. He
made a witness statement in support of the 3 respondent on 9 April, 2019. Under
cross examination from counsel for the petitioners, the witness said he was at
the local government collation centre when his party complained that the
polling unit results did not accompanied form EC8a2 to collation centre. He further
told the tribunal that the 3rd ought to have its agents at all levels during
the election, he however said that was at Tudun Wada/ Kalong Ward was an
impostor and that the real agent of the 3rd respondent was nowhere to be found.
Witness added that the Ward collation officer only came to the local government
collation centre with form EC8a without firm EC8a2 series.
After the
evidence of this witness the 3rd respondent closed its defence. In the light of
the above, the tribunal adjourned sitting on the matter until after 11 days
when counsels to all parties are expected to adopt their final written
addresses.
Post a Comment