Ogun governorship election petition tribunal strikes out Adebutu’s reply on vote-buying allegation

The Ogun Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abeokuta has dismissed a reply filed by Ladi Adebutu of People’s Democratic Party (PDP) on alleged vote-buying during the March 18 election.

Adebutu in his petition marked EPT/OG/GOV/03/2023 had challenged Gov. Dapo Abiodun’s victory based on alleged non-compliance with the Electoral Act and corrupt practices during the election.

The three-man panel led by Justice Hamidu Kunaza ruled on one of the preliminary applications during its pre-hearing sitting.

The Lead Counsel to Abiodun, Justice Wole Olanipekun, had filed an application challenging the petitioner’s reply bothering on the allegations of vote-buying by the governor during the last election.

Also, the legal team to Abiodun raised issue of vote-buying against Adebutu and the PDP in the reply to the original petition.

But the petitioner’s counsel in the response accused Abiodun, who is the second respondent, of the same allegation of financial inducement of voters.

At the last pre-hearing sitting, a member of Abiodun’s legal team, Prof Taiwo Osipitan, argued the application before the tribunal.

He said the petitioner had surreptitiously introduced vote-buying as a new issue and fact while responding to the reply.

According to him, introduction of new issue or fact in the reply was against paragraph 16 1A of the First Schedule of Electoral Act.

Osipitan said some paragraphs in the petitioner’s reply were offensive and prayed the tribunal to strike it out for being incompetent.

However, the counsel to Adebutu, Goddy Uche, asked the tribunal to reject the second respondent’s application for lacking in merit, saying it was used as a delay tactic on the petition.

Uche said the second respondent in some paragraphs in the reply made an allegation of financial inducement of voters by Adebutu during the March 18 governorship election.

He said the petitioner merely responded to the opponent’s accusations as contained in the reply to the original petition.

He added that the petitioner did not raise the issue of vote-buying in the petition ab initio.

In the ruling read by the chairman of the panel, Justice Kunaza struck out the petitioner’s reply.

The Tribunal held that the petitioner’s reply if allowed would constitute injustice as the second respondent does not have opportunity to respond to the petitioner’s reply.

The panel held that a reply should not be a medium to raise a new issue which was not raised in the petition.

“The petitioner’s reply dated May 22, 2023 is hereby struck out,” the tribunal held.

However, the Chairman emphasised that the ruling did not affect the merit of the petition as the petition itself would be determined during the hearing stage which would soon commence.

He however adjourned the sitting to June 22 for another ruling.

Speaking to newsmen shortly after the ruling, a lawyer who represented the petitioner, Olumuyiwa Obanewa said the legal team would study the ruling and decide whether or not to file an appeal.

Also speaking, a lawyer in Abiodun’s legal team, Deji Enisenyin, said the petitioner tried to bring in some new facts which ordinarily should have been part of the petition, while responding to the second respondent’s reply.

“We raised an objection to that and the court agreed with us in line with the principle.”