Riyom /Barkin Ladi Election Petitions Stop PDP From Crossing Examining Witness

Yakubu Busari

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) , on Tuesday, opened and closed its defence in Hon.Fom Dalyop Chollom petition challenging the result of the February 25th,2023 election.

Recall that Hon. Peter Gyangden was declared the winner of the election as a Member Representing Riyom /Barkin Ladi Federal constituency at the green chamber and took the oath of allegiance.

Daniel From Chollom of the Labour Party is urging the National Election Petition Court in Jos, the Plateau State Capital to set aside Peter Gyanden’s victory on the grounds that the Independent National Electoral Commission failed to comply with the electoral laws.

At the resumed proceedings on Tuesday, counsel for INEC, A.A.Madaki , proceeded to close its defence in the petition after saying that he relied on the first and second witnesses to bring their witnesses.

However, the 2nd respondent Pius A.Akubo , SAN, opened their defense without a witness but chose to tender the PDP Congress election held on 25/09/2021 which the first respondent listed in documents are marked items 1-6 ,No 6,13,20 

Fom Chollom , also testified to  defence his case as the petitioner against Hon Peter Gyangden of the Peoples Democratic Party.

He was led in evidence, who also tendered some documents in the course of the proceedings including exhibits and CTC of the State High Court judgment, Appeal Court and Federal High courts.

Akubo says, he won’t tender any documents but would rely on the 3rd respondent to avoid wasting of the Tribunal’s precious time.

However, the drama was eschewed before the Tribunal proceeded when documents marked exhibits P1-P5 receipts .and the third respondent told the court that they have sole witness accompanying the petitioners and replied that he is a normal witness.

The PW1 the sole witness Barr. Panshak Ilisha Dakyen resident at No 22 Yakubu Gowon way opposite Natosha legal practitioner explains that his witness statement on oaths dated 26/03/2023 was identified through signature.

The witness, under cross-examination, referred to paragraph 9 which is a letter from INEC monitoring the conduct of repeated Plateau State PDP, and secondly the State judgment page 21-31 of the respondent where he referred to paragraphs 10 of Augustine Timku judgment from FHC of 22/02/2022.

Akubo , SAN, said that we are in the stage of defense so the petitioner’s counsel has to begin the cross-examination in subsistence trial of the election Tribunal under section 122 of the electoral act but the petitioners opposed the application the Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Edward Pwajok by virtue of the proceedings the 2nd respondent declined his right under section 293 and 122 of the evidence act which there is no prove to show that the petitioners would conduct the cross-examination before the respondents.

While delivering a bench ruling on the two issues raised by the senior learned counsel, Pius Akubo ,SAN, in view of the cross-examination the Tribunal granted an order that the first respondent has to cross-examination the 3rd respondent shall recross examine his witness.

Hon. Justice. Tukur Mohammed, said that the Tribunal is constrained to the decision of fundamental rights and fair hearing of brought by the Second respondent of the 1999 constitution as amended.