The candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the last governorship election in Bayelsa state, Timipre Sylva has accused members of the tribunal hearing his petition against the outcome of the election of being biased.
In a March 4 petition by his lawyer, S. E. Elema (SAN) to the President of the Court of Appeal, Sylva begged for reconstitution of a fresh panel to take his petition.
He accused members of the tribunal of allegedly engaging in inaccurate recording of proceedings and being unduly harsh towards the petitioners.
Sylva and the APC are petitioners in the petition, marked: EPT/BY/Gov/04/2023 while the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Governor Douye Diri, Deputy Governor Lawrence Ewhrujakpo and their party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) are listed as respondents.
Sylva accused the tribunal members of allegedly imposing an unrealistic time limit, during which he could only call 49 witnesses out of the 234 he had planned to call.
He claimed that in eleven when the tribunal still had about three months to sit, it limited the petitioners to only eight days to conduct their case.
Sylva had closed his case on February 27 after calling 49 witnesses, following which the tribunal led by Justice A. A. Adeleye (with Justices I. S. Galadima and Abdu Maiwada Abubakar as members) adjourned till March 4 for defence.
When parties got to court on March 4 the tribunalâs chairman, Justice Adeleye told lawyers to the parties that the petitioners had filed a petition, questioning the neutrality and integrity of members of the tribunal.
He added that the petitioners also want an indefinite adjournment pending the Court of Appeal Presidentâs decision on their petition.
Justice Adeleye then sought the views of lawyers on the responsibility of respondents on the issue.
INECâs lawyer, Charles Edosomwan (SAN) observed that the APC and Sylva were not fair to the tribunal in their allegations of bias and inaccurate recording of proceedings distortion of facts.
Chris Uche (SAN) for Governor Douye Diri, Chukwuma Machukwu Umeh (SAN) for Deputy Governor Ewhrujakpo, and Tayo Oyetibo (SAN) for the PDP spoke against the petition but conceded to an adjournment.
Ruling, Justice Adeleye granted the petitionerâs request for indefinite adjournment.
He adjourned the case to await the decision of the Court of Appeal President on the petition.
Part of the petition reads: âWe respectfully request your lordship to disband and reconstitute the membership of the said tribunal based on the following grounds:
âThe petitioners had 234 witnesses to call but the tribunal insisted that the petitioners must call all their witnesses and conclude their case within seven days.
âAfter much pressure, the tribunal extended the period by one extra day.
âIn order to comply with this deadline, the petitioners scheduled to call 25 witnesses per day, but the tribunal could only take about eight witnesses each day.
âIn the face of this impossible situation, the petitioners had no choice but to close their case on Tuesday 27th February, 2024 after calling only 49 witnesses out of the 234 witnesses.
âThe case was thereafter adjourned to Monday 4th March, 2024 for defence. In the meantime, counsel to the various parties applied for certified true copies of the record of proceedings.
âIt was a clear breach of the right of fair hearing to prevent the petitioners from calling all their witnesses when the lifespan of the tribunal still has over three months to its expiration date.
âUpon the perusal of the record of proceedings, we were perplexed to find that the tribunal had already made their findings and decisions in respect of the authenticity and weight of the documents (polling unit results) tendered by the petitioners even before the conclusion of the case.
âAt page 53 (of the record), the tribunal wrote that the petitionersâ witness identified the document shown to him by the respondents, instead of the correct position which is that the petitionerâs witnesses consistently rejected documents shown to them by the respondents as fake.
It further stated: âAt page 60, the tribunal wrote that the petitionersâ counsel asked for adjournment whereas what happened was that, upon the insistence of the respondentâs counsel that documents to be tendered were not made available to them beforehand, the tribunal adjourned.
âIt is obvious from the forgoing that the petitioners cannot get justice from the tribunal as presently constituted, since it is obvious that the tribunal Chairman has descended into the arena of the legal conflict between the parties.
âIn light of the abnormalities mentioned above, we respectfully request your lordship to disband the membership of the tribunal and reconstitute same urgently.
âAs earlier indicated above, we have up till the 28th of May, 2024 before the lifespan of the tribunal will expire.
âSo, there is still enough time for a new tribunal to start de novo (afresh) and conclude the trial within the constitutional lifespan of 180 days.â




[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials

Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________
Alexander Payne Co. Law Reports
Contact & Orders đ 0704 444 4777 | 0704 444 4999 | 0818 199 9888 đ www.alexandernigeria.com