Few days to the expiration of the mandatory 180-day timeline for the conclusion of post-election court cases, an air of apprehension currently pervades many states about the possible outcomes of electoral cases filed at the various state election petitions tribunals.

On Wednesday, the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) dismissed the petitions of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party.

Following the outcome of the judgment, politicians, stakeholders and state actors are apprehensive on where the pendulum will shift.

Senior lawyers told Saturday Sun that Wednesday’s ruling of the Presidential Election Petitions Court would no doubt have considerable influence on the cases in the states.

Based on the new constitutional provisions, State Governorship Elections Tribunals are expected to give judgment within the next two weeks.

Out of the 28 states where governorship elections were held, many of the winners declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) were dragged by their opponents who felt short-changed by the electoral body to the election tribunals.

Analysts have noted that cases in four or five states are quite contentious and “anything can happen” in any of the states.

The States are Ebonyi, Ogun, Kaduna and Nasarawa.

In Kaduna State, Isah Ashiru, PDP governorship candidate, who won more local governments, is challenging the emergence of Uba Sani as governor of the State.

David Ombugadu, PDP governorship candidate in Nasarawa State, also won more local government areas. However, Abdullahi Sule of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), was declared winner.

With the upcoming tribunal judgment, there is anxiety among politicians in the state over the possible outcome of the case.

In Ogun State, Oladipupo Adebutu, PDP governorship candidate, who also claims to have won more local governments areas, is challenging Dapo Abiodun of the APC who was announced winner.

Francis Ogbonna Erishi Nwifuru, governor of Ebonyi State, is facing a stiff challenge from the PDP and LP governorship candidates in tye elections.

Kabir Akingbolu, a senior lawyer has said the possible outcomes were already creating tension in the state.

He said some issues had been resolved and put to rest, explaining that what could changed such is if the Supreme Court rules otherwise on the issues.

Akingbolu said any governors or lawmakers who have similar issues to what have been resolved at PEPT should not expect any miracle but to continue to pray that the Supreme Court rule otherwise on it.

But in a chat with Saturday Sun, former chairman, Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), Ikeja Branch, Dave Ajetumobi shared a contrary view on the issue. He said some issues might be similar but their facts may be different and therefore cannot be predicted.

Ajetumobi said the state tribunals might not tread the path of the PEPT on some issues based on facts and arguments before them.

Reviewing the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal judgment, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr. Joseph Nwobike, said the verdict agrees with the established principles of law that govern election litigations in Nigeria.

He noted, however, that parties who are dissatisfied with the decision are at liberty to proceed to the Supreme Court to test the Tribunal’s judgment.

Nwobike said: “The learned justices on the Tribunal’s Bench examined and resolved all the issues of law and fact in favour of the respondents after considering the evidence led and the applicable laws.

Human rights lawyer and former President of the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR), Malachy Ugwumadu, said all the election tribunal matters that have similar issues like some issues that were resolved at the PEPT would likely toe the same line.

He said PEPT’s verdict has set a precedence for the yet to be determined election matters still pending at the tribunals.

The former CDHR president said what could utter or set aside the precedent set PEPT’s verdict is Supreme Court ruling on such.

Ugwumadu said with PEPT’s verdict, what would be the outcome of some of the cases still pending at the election tribunal which have similar issues with presidential election, was no longer secret.

However, he said any cases that had been resolved or ruled on before the new PEPT’s judgment could not be affected again unless the apex court rules otherwise if there is an appeal.

In his view, rights activist and lawyer, Habeeb Lawal stated that pending election petition matters which have similar issues with ones resolved at PEPT might have same outcome if the lawyer involved cited same authorities to argue his or her case.

He said any other election tribunal still holding is inferior to PEPT and so therefore, based on law PEPT’s verdict has become a precedent.

Lawal noted that what could set aside PEPT’s verdict on some of the issues earlier resolved was Supreme Court’s ruling and it would only happen if there is appeal to it effect. (Saturday Sun)

Update news