By CHARLES IWUOHA

The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate for the February 3, 2024, Ebonyi South Senatorial Bye-election, Barrister Silas Ọnụ has accused the Election Petition Tribunal Judges hearing his petition of bias.

Onu, made the accusations in a petition to the President of the Court of Appeal dated 29^th April, 2024, wherein he asked the President of the appellate court to disband the panel and institute a new one.

Onu is challenging the declaration of Processor Anthony Okorie of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

He accused the three judges of the tribunal namely Justice H.N. Kunaza, Justice Basset Nkanang and Justice M. O. Agboola, of blatant disregard for justice.

He explained that on 15th of April he applied via a Motion on Notice for an order of Inspection of electoral material, specifically the BVAS, which was specifically pleaded in the Petition.

Mr Ọnụ noted that while the motion was opposed by the 2^nd and 3^rd Respondents, INEC the first respondent against whom the application was made, did not oppose it.

“We made our case for the grant of the order for inspection to be done during the trial and supported the application with a recent Supreme Court decision showing that the Tribunal has the power to grant such an application in the interest of justice.

“In any case, the 2^nd and 3^rd Respondents also pleaded the BVAS in their respective replies to the Petition.”

He lamented that the tribunal on Saturday, being April 27, 2024, delivered its ruling on the application dismissing same on the ground that granting it will amount to amending the Petition.

He argued that this claim by the Tribunal can best be described as arguing the case of the Respondents in the most untruthful manner

“It can never be acceptable to me and should not be allowed to infest the already beleaguered reputation of the Nigerian Judiciary, especially in election cases”, he argued.

Explaining further, Mr Onu said the tribunal’s claim that the petitioners in their petition did not plead BVAS is false.

“This is not only false, but manifestly wicked and clearly intended to pervert justice by denying the Petitioner the right to present their case and evidence before the tribunal, because the BVAS was copiously pleaded in paragraph 42 (16) of the Petition at page 32 in the following word “The BVAS machines used in the election for physical inspection of the data stored therein, together with their respective serial numbers”.

Onu further accused the tribunal of hurriedly fixing Tuesday 30^th of April for tendering of documents and May 2^nd for him to open his case without availing him the certified true copy of the ruling.

This is clearly calculated to force me to conduct and close my case to the benefit of the Respondents in the Petition.

He expressed concern over the inability of the panel to give chance for their perverse ruling to be challenged on appeal but rather plans to rush the case in order to ensure that this vital evidence BVAS does not form part of documents that will be presented at the trail.

He noted that the petition is not intended to substitute the judicial remedy for the biased rulling which will be appealed against adding that the petition is an administrative approach which has become necessary as the petitioner, no longer have confidence in the ability of the panel to be neutral.

“The need to replace them is now urgent and real. He noted that the panel members are lodged in a place called Cirenes Hotel in Abakaliki. This hotel belongs to a very well-known APC stalwart. With this obvious biased ruling, I am free to tie up all loose ends and draw a conclusion that the panel in under influence.

I have seen, from the conduct of the panel on this ruling that they are brutally unjust and are not interested in doing any justice to the petition.

He maintained that he will appeal the ruling and have instructed his legal team to immediately file an appeal adding that the petition is to administratively register his total lack of trust in the panel as they are manifestly bias and not interested in doing justice. I have no confidence in the collectively ability of the names members of the panel to do justice in the case.

“Continuing with this panel is tantamount to having a seal fate, as nothing just can come from them. I have taken this step not because I am afraid of losing a case, I have long before now been an advocate of justice sector reform

“My Lord, while we are appealing the unjust ruling of this Tribunal, I am praying that you use your good office to disband this panel and replace them as I cannot in all good conscience trust anything that is coming from this Panel any longer.

“They are compromised and it is apparent in the ruling that they delivered. Thankfully, trial is yet to commence and a new unbiased panel can still be appointed to hear the Petition and determine same, whatever the outcome.

“Continuing with this panel is tantamount to having a sealed fate, as nothing just can come from them. A panel that lied against a Petitioner by claiming that the Petitioner made an application that was never made.

“A panel that lied about pleaded facts, claiming that such a fact was not pleaded! My Lord, if there is still a shred of hope in the judiciary, especially those under your control, then this panel has to be replaced by you and a new one appointed in the overall interest of justice”, he added.

Update news