Tribunal: PDP Witnesses Strengthen Omen Bassey’s Petition

It was a mild drama yesterday at The State House Of Assembly Election Petitions Tribunal between the All Progressives Congress (APC) and her candidate Barr. Omen Bassey (Petitioners), against the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), her candidate, Hon. Asuquo Edet Archibong and Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) as (Respondents), holden at High Court Premises, Metro road, Uyo.

Barr. Omen Bassey is challenging the wrongful declaration of Hon. Asuquo Edet Archibong as Member representing Urue Offong/Oruko State Constituency by the 3rd and 4th Respondents.

The Petitioners’ legal team led by Chief Victor Iyanam had so far called Seven witnesses across the Wards of Urueoffong/Oruko State Constituency to prove their petition and shocking testimonies were made through their testimonies.

It was a dramatic session yesterday, when the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents teams led by Barr. Ekemini Udim, Barr. Emmanuel Akpan, and Barr. S J.Uko respectively were offered opportunity to present their defense.

(RW1) and (RW2) Comrade Charles Emene from Ward 5, Unit 02, Secondary School, Okossi Village and Offong Okon Ward 9 Unit 02, gave life to the Petitioner’s case after accepting their written deposition on oath that there was proper accreditation and peaceful Election in their areas and acknowledged same as exhibits before the Tribunal.

They averred that the election conducted by the 3rd and 4th Respondents was free, fair and credible while also stating that as Ward Collation Agents of their Party, they voted in their Units and thereafter witnessed the coalition of Ward results at the Ward Collation Centres in Primary School, Okossi and Government Primary School, Eyulor where they claimed to have signed the results sheets.

But under cross examination by petitioners counsel, the witnesses were bombed with questions from exhibit (P35) and (P43) which are the voters registers from their respective units. After showing the exhibits to the witnesses, behold, they couldn’t show that they were accredited before voting thereby supporting the Petitioner’s allegation that the election was marred by irregularities and wasn’t conducted in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act.