PDP, Adebutu’s case against Abiodun pack of lies, distortions – APC

According to Governor Dapo Abiodun and the All Progressives Congress (APC), the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the March 18 governorship election in Ogun State, Hon. Ladi Adebutu, are wasting their time at the Ogun State Election Petitions Tribunal because their petitions are based on inconsistencies and distortions.

This argument was presented in Abiodun and the Ogun State Chapter of the APC’s last written addresses as respondents in the lawsuit brought against them. They argued that the petitioners did a terrible job and failed to prove their case.

According to them, Adebutu and PDP’s case collapsed because they introduced coached and untrustworthy witnesses, relied on documents that directly refuted the testimony of their witnesses, and introduced experts whose testimony and records were deemed to be dubious.

Adebutu and the PDP, they contended, have dirty hands because they have been accused of purchasing votes, and so are not entitled to equity.

They also claimed that the petitioners’ 87 witnesses were unreliable because 38 of them claimed to be polling unit agents without providing evidence for their claim and 49 of the petitioners’ witnesses who testified as voters gave identical testimony with identical errors, leading the tribunal to conclude that the witnesses’ depositions were too obvious to be coincidental and were therefore unbelievable and of no probative value.

While the Margin of Lead principle has its origins in section 134 of the Electoral Act, Abiodun/APC argued that the petition itself was based on sections 24, 47, 51, and 62 of the Electoral Act, all of which are inconsistent with the margin of lead principle.

Adebutu did not tender the BVAS machines for any of the 990 units complained about, thus they maintained, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Oyetola v. Adeleke, that the petitioners did not prove overvoting.

While it is true that the petitioners made it clear that Governor Abiodun was “duly sponsored” by the APC, the respondents argued that Adebutu failed to provide evidence to support his claim of forgery against Abiodun, and that the Tribunal had to call in a WAEC official to produce a certified copy of the same certificate that Abiodun had submitted to INEC at the governor’s request.

In addition, they stated that the petitioners had not given any judgment to back up their argument that Governor Abiodun should not be Governor due to a conviction in Miami, USA.

For example, Abiodun/APC argued that a disqualifying conviction must have occurred within the previous ten years before to the election, but a non-qualifying decision refers to actions that allegedly occurred 37 years earlier.

Petitioners also failed to provide evidence for their claims that Adebutu and the PDP received a majority of lawful votes after deducting APC’s unlawful votes and adding their own excluded votes. This was despite the fact that the numbers in the petition (63,015 and 35,228) didn’t match the numbers in their witness report (62,998 and 34,368).

Finally, the respondents pointed out that, while the petitioners failed to present any evidence that could be used in court to support their claims of vote-buying against Governor Abiodun, the details of massive vote-buying conducted by Adebutu during the election were established in two police investigation reports, and Adebutu (who is currently at large) and other PDP chieftains are currently standing criminal trial for these crimes.