A’Ibom Tribunal: Udom, PDP Makes Case For Ekere, APC

…Deceiving Udom an immediate business opportunity for his team

“The APC has failed to establish any case in the matter, so their petition against the election of Gov. Udom (PDP) should be struck out.”

The above statement is credited to Lead Counsel for Deacon Udom.

This isn’t just to deceive the remnant supporters of the Deacon but a prima facie bait for the stranger Governor. The business plan is to have him spend convincingly going forward in the hope that there would be a super man outing by his legal team.

Anyone without knowledge of the case before the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal may be vulnerable to the lie expressed in the Counsel’s statement above. This may likely be the fate with our Lagos based Governor.

The case has records from where the principal witness of the 2nd Respondent (PDP), Sen. Ibok Essien adjudged the elections to be the freest and fairest ever in the history of the State, yet under cross-examination, couldn’t even locate his name in the voter register for his area despite his admission of accreditation and voting.

It is important to point out that contrary to the confidence clone in the Counsel’s statement, the respondent’s lawyers have made a shambolic representation at the tribunal evident in the quality of witnesses paraded to defend INEC’s fraud of March 9th, 2019.

Gov. Udom Emmanuel, in his defence brought before the tribunal witnesses that were either not accredited to vote or whose names were not even in the voter’s registers and despite ineligibility, admitted to having voted for Deacon Udom.

The likes of RW 8 – Mr Ime Umanah from Ukanafun, RW 9 – Akpan Monday. RW 10 – Iboro Joseph Ikanna from Ukana Ikot Essien in Essien Udim, RW 11 – Ubong Augustine Isang from Ukpom Anwana in Ikono, RW 12 – Samuel Bassey Nyong from Nsit Atai, RW 14 – Wilfred U. Okon from Ibikpe in Uruan, RW 15 – Etim Essien Ukim from Edok Oruko in Urue Offong/ Oruko, RW 16 – Aniefiok Ekerefre from Anua in Uyo all claimed to have been accredited but were not.

RW 7 – Ubong Jonah from Ibesikpo Asutan, RW 13 – Uduak Akpan from Edemeya in Ikot Abasi and RW 23 – Sen. Ibok Essien from Ikot Ekpene also claimed to have been accredited but could not find their names on the registers at all.

Though ironic but logically true that all the respondents’ witnesses added life to the petition.
It was late in the day for INEC (the 3rd respondent) to suddenly realise that ‘bringing more witnesses was not going to help their case’.

Election Petition Tribunal would be committed to justice and continue to remain the hope of the ordinary Nigerian.

Institutions of state such as INEC cannot be allowed to commit a crime that is not just treasonous but capable of incitement and threat to national security.

JusticeForONE

JusticeforALL