Join our Telegram group and receive breaking and trending news updates directly on your phone.
Join for News Updates âś•
Ighodalo and Okpobholo.
By Daniel Peters .
The Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal will on Wednesday, April 2, 2025, deliver judgement in the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Asue Ighodalo, against the September 21, 2024 governorship election in the state.
The PDP and Ighodalo are challenging the decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to declare Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the election.
They alleged that the election was marred by irregularities.
The three-member tribunal, headed by Justice Wilfred Kpochi, had, on March 3, reserved judgement in the petition after parties adopted their final written addresses.
The tribunal will deliver judgement in the three petitions marked: EPT/ED/GOV/01/2024, EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024 and EPT/ED/GOV/03/2024.
The tribunal had, on January 31, admitted in evidence, 148 Bimodal Voter Accreditation System Machines (BVAS) that were used during the conduct of the disputed governorship election.
The electronic devices were tendered by a Senior Technical Officer in the ICT Department of INEC, Anthony Itodo, and admitted in evidence by the panel.
The petitioners had subpoenaed INEC to produce the BVAS machines that were used in 133 polling units where election results are being disputed.
INEC had declared that Okpebholo of the APC secured 291,667 votes to defeat his closest rival, Ighodalo of the PDP, who got 247,655 votes.
Dissatisfied with the outcome of the poll, the PDP and its candidate approached the tribunal, praying it to nullify INEC’s declaration of Okpebholo as the winner of the election.
The petitioners, among other things, contended that the governorship election was invalid because of alleged non-compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.
However, the APC and Okpebholo urged the tribunal to dismiss the petitions for being baseless, arguing that the petitioners failed to substantiate the allegations in their petitions.
