Law News
Ihedioha wins round 2 at Tribunal

The gubernatorial candidate of People’s Democratic Party, PDP, in the last general election, Chief Emeka Ihedioha, again smiled home yesterday, following another ruling of the Election Petition Tribunal in his favour.

The Tribunal had during an earlier sitting, turned down the preliminary objection raised by the defence that they were not properly served the processes.

Following this ruling, the defence quickly commenced another round of legal fireworks, urging the Tribunal to allow some of the defendants more time to enable them give proper response to the suit filed by Ihedioha and the PDP.

Responding to the plea of the defence lawyers, as well as citing several legal authorities, Ihedioha’s lead counsel, Chef Mike Ahamba, SAN, raised serious objection to the prayers on the ground that the time allowed them by law to exchange pleadings among the parties involved in the suit had elapsed.

After listening carefully to the submissions on all sides, the Tribunal then reserved ruling for yesterday, on whether or not to allow some of the defendants who pleaded for time to enable them respond to the PDP and Ihedioha’s petition.

Delivering his ruling yesterday,Tribunal chairman, Hon. Justice David Wyon, upheld Ahamba’s argument that their time had elapsed.

He said the only evidence any party could rely on to claim that he was not served was the proof of service, stressing that this could only be when the proof of service was not there or stated otherwise.

Continuing, the Tribunal chairman ruled that “in the instant case, evidence show that all the defendants were duly served as indicated in the proof of service”.

Justice Wyon said: “While some of the defendants chose to respond, others decided to go into deep slumber and the Tribunal cannot wait for somebody who went into slumber to wake up and tell the court how to conduct its business according to the law”.

The Tribunal, therefore, ruled that it was convinced that the defendants were duly served and that the period allowed by law for exchange of pleadings among the parties had elapsed.

Click here to read from source.

You must be logged in to post a comment.