Court of Appeal Rejects SDP Request to Relocate Ekiti Governorship Tribunal
The Court of Appeal has rejected a request by counsel to the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in Ekiti State, Ebenezer Akinbuli, for the relocation of the Ekiti State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal over alleged security concerns.
The tribunal had earlier adjourned proceedings from September 16 to September 23 to allow the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, to consider the petitioners’ request for a change of venue following an alleged assault on SDP counsel.
However, in the absence of the SDP counsel, another letter was served on the tribunal seeking a further adjournment pending the determination of the application for the relocation of the hearing.
At Tuesday’s proceedings, the chairman of the three-member tribunal, Justice Abubakar Kutigi, informed the parties that the President of the Court of Appeal had declined to order a transfer of the sitting.
Justice Kutigi said the tribunal remained properly constituted and was therefore competent to continue hearing the petitions.
Counsel to the All Progressives Congress (APC), Kabir Akingbolu, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Bunmi Ipinlaiye, however, said they were unaware of the Court of Appeal’s decision, which had been served through the secretary of the tribunal.
To clear any doubt over the matter, Justice Kutigi further adjourned proceedings to September 24 for continuation of the hearing.
Speaking with journalists after the proceedings, Akingbolu said the petitioners had renewed their demand for the tribunal to be relocated from Ado-Ekiti to another venue.
He clarified that the request for relocation was made in connection with the SDP petition and not the Action Alliance (AA) petition.
The APC counsel also alleged that the petitioners were responsible for the latest adjournment, saying letters seeking an adjournment had been filed in respect of both election petitions.
Akingbolu described the petition challenging Governor Biodun Oyebanji’s victory as unusual, arguing that the margin of victory and voting pattern made the case unprecedented in his view.
According to him, Oyebanji won all 16 local government areas and most of the 177 wards in the state.
He questioned the basis of the challenge by the petitioners, whom he said recorded relatively low vote figures during the election.
Akingbolu further alleged that the petitioners were employing different tactics to delay proceedings, including repeated applications for adjournments, and urged them to concentrate on the substantive issues before the tribunal.
“There is confusion, so we need to clarify it. The SDP filed a petition and the AA filed a petition. On the last adjourned day, September 16, a petition was written by counsel to the party, SDP, saying that there was no security and that the venue of the tribunal should be moved to Abuja or elsewhere,” Akingbolu said.
“As it is today, they are secure. They are the ones that sought the adjournment. The court has now adjourned the matter to tomorrow for continuation at the instance of the petitioners because they wrote the petition and a letter of adjournment to that effect on both election petitions.”
He added: “It is an unprecedented petition. The success of the governor and the people is unprecedented. The 16 local governments, almost the entire 177 wards, were won by the governor.
“There was no challenge from the people that filed the petition. None of the political parties called up to 200 votes. It has never happened in Nigeria in a governorship election that somebody who has not scored thousands, or even hundreds, will come and file an election petition.
“For me, I don’t think it is proper. We are here because this is litigation. If somebody writes that kind of petition when there is no ground, I think it is an illegal step.”
