From GODWIN TSA, Abuja
The Head, Election and Party Monitoring Department of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr. Charles Okoye yesterday told the Rivers State governorship election tribunal that the April 11, 2015 election in the state was a sham and mockery of democracy as it was characterised by militant terrorism, large scale violence and disruption of polls through snatching of election materials, shooting and allocation of figures.
Okoye, who gave evidence at the instance of a subpoena on the acting National Chairman of the Commission, stated that as the head of election and party monitoring, no other person either within or outside INEC was better equipped and competent to give an account of what transpired during the April 11, governorship election than himself.
He gave his evidence amid stiff opposition from the counsel to INEC, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN)who said he was not aware that he (Okoye) was coming to the tribunal to testify for the petitioners.
Ikpeazu was joined by counsel to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN) and Emmanuel Ukala (SAN) for Governor Nyesom Wike to opposed the appearance of Okoye at the tribunal.
It was their common argument that an electoral officer of the Commission was duty bound to defend an election petition but where he chooses to do otherwise, he must seek and obtained the consent of the Attorney General of the Federation.
According to Ikpeazu, “where INEC is made a party, in this case as a respondent, all the officials of INEC are respondents. For an officer to be called as a witness by a petitioner, not just to tender documents, but to give oral evidence, will violate paragraph 5 [1] to the first schedule to the evidence Act. He urged the court to disqualify the witness from testifying
But in his reply, counsel to the petitioner, Chef Akin Olujinmi (SAN) said the respondents relied on old Evidence Act adding that if they were able to purchase the amended copy of the Act, they will not be arguing as they did.
He told the tribunal that on December 29, the National Assembly enacted the Electoral Act No. 10 which deleted the said paragraph 51 [1] hinged their arguments upon and substituted it with Para 51 (1)
The reason for the amendment according to Olujinmi, was to prevent a situation whereby INEC will commit atrocities in an election and then seek the cover of the law to prevent the scrutiny of their illegal act and to also stop whistle blowers from giving evidence. He therefore urged the court to ignore the argument.
In his ruling on the issue, Justice Suleiman Ambrosa overruled the objection and allowed the witness to proceed with his evidence.
Okoye said he monitored the election with three INEC National Commissioners with his monitoring team in 19 out of the 23 local government areas of the state.
His words: “During the monitoring exercise, what we observed was that election was a warfare. It was a militant terrorism and also a sham, a kangaro election. It is a mockery of democracy. The election was characterised large scale violence and disruption of polls. There were snatching of election materials, shooting and allocation of figures and all kind of impunity happened at the election. At the end of the monitoring exercise, we wrote a report, which I signed with other members of the EPM department that went to other LGs in the state.”
Five officers of the Nigerian Army had earlier testified how the governorship election was aborted by activities of thugs who hijacked and carted away electoral materials amidst sporadic shootings in four local government areas in the state.