Thursday, 6 August 2015

Jubilation in Rivers State As Tribunal Strikes out 4 PETITIONS Filed against Gov. WikeJubilation in Rivers State As Tribunal Strikes out 4 PETITIONS Filed against Gov. Wike




Happiness best describe the mood of Rivers State people this morning following a report that four out of five petitions filed against Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State has been strike out by the state Governorship Election Petitions Trib[post_ad]unal sitting in Abuja.

They said that this development is a triiumphant of democracy.

However, it would be recalled that only surviving petition challenging the declaration of Wike of PDP as the winner of the April 11 election is the one filed by the All Progressives Congress and its governorship candidate, Dr. Dakuku Peterside.
One of the four trashed petitions marked EPT/RV/GOV/05/2015 was voluntarily withdrawn by the petitioner, Kemka Elenwo; KOWA Party’s governorship candidate in the election, while other three were dismissed on technical grounds based on Wike and his party’s application.
Justice Mu’azu Pindiga-led tribunal, while dismissing the fourth petition marked EPT/RV/GOV/03/2015 filed by Minaibim Harry of the Social Democratic Party on the grounds that the petition was incompetent, added that it lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the petition since the two grounds on which it was anchored were defective and not in strict compliance with the provisions of Section 138(1) (a) to (d) of the Electoral Act.
The said provision of the Electoral Act prescribes the grounds on which an election petition can be filed.
Other petitions that have been dismissed by the tribunal include the one filed by the Labour Party (EPT/RV/GOV/01/2015) and another by the All Progressive Grand Alliance and its candidate, Charles Harry, (EPT/RV/GOV/02/2015).
In its ruling on July 31, Justice Pindiga, who dismissed the petition by the Labour Party which fielded Tonye Princewill in the April 11 election, held that the party did not have a candidate for the election having not complied with the requirement under Section 85(1) of the Electoral Act (EA) 2010.
It noted that the notice given by the petitioner to INEC of its intention to conduct a primary election from which the petitioner’s candidate purportedly emerged “is less than the mandatory 21 days required by Section 85(1) of the Electoral Act.
“By implication, the effect of this non-compliance, is that no valid primary election was conducted and held by the petitioner and its purported candidate.”
The tribunal also found that the petitioner did not comply with the required procedure for applying for the issuance of pre-hearing notice, a default which rendered the petition inco[post_ad]
nsequential.

SHARE THIS

Author:

Etiam at libero iaculis, mollis justo non, blandit augue. Vestibulum sit amet sodales est, a lacinia ex. Suspendisse vel enim sagittis, volutpat sem eget, condimentum sem.

0 comments: