The Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal has finally affirmed the election of Governor Monday Okpebholo and the All Progressives Congress, APC, in the September 21, 2024 governorship poll in Edo State.

On Wednesday in Abuja, the three-man panel of the tribunal upheld the election as being validly conducted, just as it dismissed the petition brought before it by Asue Ighodalo and the Peoples Democratic Party.

Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Wilfred Kpochi delivered the landmark judgment on Wednesday evening.

Among others, the tribunal held that the petitioners failed to prove over-voting and also failed to call relevant witnesses

Besides, Justice Kpochi asserted that Ighodalo and PDP did not speak to the documents they tendered, instead the documents were dumped on the tribunal

To prove over-voting, the tribunal said that the two petitioners are required by law to tender the voter’s register, BVAS and EC8A which they did not do according the requirements of the law.

Similarly, the tribunal Chairman held that no eye witnesses were called to testify on alleged over-voting and such making the allegations unbelievable.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had last year declared Okpebholo and APC winners of the governorship election having polled a majority votes 291, 667 to defeat his closet rival, Ighodalo of PDP, who garnered 247, 655 votes.

Not satisfied with the declaration, PDP and Ighodalo had sued the INEC praying for nullification of Okpebholo’s victory on the grounds of irregularities and non-compliance with the electoral laws.

The petitioners anchored their claims on alleged over-voting and wrong computation of results during collation of results.

Claiming that they have successfully demonstrated electoral malpractices in 765 polling units out of 4,519 across the state, the two petitioners through their lawyer Mr. Ken Mozia, SAN, emphasised that the petition should be determined by the impact of irregularities, not just the percentage of affected polling units.

Mozia highlighted discrepancies at various collation levels, where figures on Form EC8A (polling unit results) were allegedly reduced at the ward and local government collation stages (EC8B).