The State and National Assembly Appeal Court sitting in Lagos yesterday reserved judgment in the two separate appeals filed by the governorship candidate of the Labour Party in Lagos State, Gbadebo-Rhodes Vivour and governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party Azeez Adediran challenging the March 18, 2023, governorship election.
The Election Petitions Tribunal had on September 25, 2023, upheld the re-election of Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu and his deputy Obafemi Hamzat as the duly elected governor of the state.
The Tribunal had in its unanimous decision dismissed the two petitions filed by the Peoples Democratic Party and its governorship candidate Olajide Adediran, and that of the Labour Party, and its governorship candidate Rhodes-Vivour.
At the hearing of the two appeals yesterda, the lead Justice of the three man panel led by Justice Yargata Nimpar reserved the judgment after taking arguments from parties.
Other Justices of the panel are Justice Samuel Bola and Justice Paul Justice Paul Bassi.
The Justices said that the date of the judgment will be communicated to the parties in the appeals.
The Respondents, in the appeal are the Independent National Electoral Commission, Governor, and his deputy, Obafemi Hamzat as well as the All Progressives Congress.
Earlier the lead counsel of the Labour Party Olagbade Benson urged the court to allow the appeal and set aside the decision of the Tribunal and grant the reliefs sought.
He urged the court to interpret Section 182 (1) (a) of the Constitution and its implication to the qualification of 2nd and 3rd respondents.
Gbadebo-Rhodes Vivour had on October 7, 2023, filed 21 grounds of Notice of Appeal challenging the decision of the State Governorship Tribunal which upheld the return of Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu.
The appeal among others stated that the Tribunal erred in law when it held that the burden of proof of the specific oath of allegiance subscribed to by the 3rd Respondent as well and the evidence of his renounced citizenship rests on the appellant.
It also stated that the Tribunal failed to disqualify Sanwo-Olu and his deputy having found that Hamzat is a naturalized United States of America citizen who made a declaration of allegiance to that country.
The case of the Appellant was substantially that the 3rd Respondent made a declaration of allegiance to the United States America and voluntarily acquired the citizenship of that country.
Benson argued that Section 177 of the 1999 Constitution states that only a Nigerian citizen by birth is qualified to contest for the office of Governor and Deputy Governor of a State.
In his response counsel to the 2nd and 3rd respondents Wole Olanipekun (SAN), urged the court to dismiss the appeal.
He contended that the dual citizenship aruged by the appeallant was never presented before the Tribunal.
“They are now presenting a case of dual citizenship, they believe that this is a trial court.
“The tribunal found out that the purported oath of allegiance to a foreign country was not before it so it ruled it out.
“We urge your Lordship to dismiss this appeal,” he said.
In the appeal of the Peoples Democratic Party, governorship candidate, Azeez Adediran alias Jandor filed 34 grounds of appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal which declared Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu as the winner of the election.
In the appeal dated October 13, 2023, Adediran expressed dissatisfaction with the judgment of the lower court, and described the verdict as a miscarriage of Law.
He asked the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment of the tribunal.
He stated that the Tribunal erred in law and thereby reached a wrong conclusion when it dismissed the petition he lodged to challenge the qualification of Sanwo-Olu who was announced as the winner of the election.
The appellant also faulted the tribunal for striking out from his petition, Gbedebo Rhodes-Vivour, saying since he also alleged that the sponsorship of Rhodes-Vivour, was also invalid, the Tribunal must also invalidate his candidacy.
However, Jandor, urged the Court of Appeal to agree with his prayers by disqualifying the APC and LP candidates while declaring their votes wasted.
In his response counsel to Sanwo-Olu and Hamzat, Mr Bode Olanipekun (SAN) submitted that the reliefs sought by the Appellants are such that they must succeed on the strength of their petition and not on the weakness of the respondents’ defence.
He argued that the Appellants did not prove anything before the lower Tribunal and no burden shifted to the Respondents to disprove any fact.
“In the instant case, the petitioner tendered the alleged false document (Exhibit P36) from the bar, the petitioners could not produce before the Court the Original document from which exhibit P36 was counterfeit.
“It is trite law that where oral evidence and documentary evidence tendered by a party in proof of a fact says different, that party cannot be said to have led credible and cogent evidence in proof of that fact,” Olanipekun said.
