Supreme Court Affirms Peter Mbah as Enugu Governor

Supreme Court Affirms Peter Mbah as Enugu Governor

The Supreme Court on Friday affirmed the election of Peter Mbah as the governor of Enugu State.

The apex court, in a unanimous decision delivered by a five-member panel of justices on Friday, dismissed an appeal filed by the Labour Party and its candidate, Chijioke Edeoga, challenging the outcome of the governorship election held on March 18, 2023.

Both the Election Petitions Tribunal and the Appeal Court had upheld the declaration of Mbah as the winner of the March 18th Governorship poll conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission.

But not satisfied, Edeoga and LP challenged the victory at the Apex court.

The tribunal had on the first ground of the petitioner’s petition which bothered on the non-qualification of Peter Mbah for allegedly forging his National Youth Service Corps discharge certificate, held that “NYSC certificate is not a qualification for anyone who wants to run for the office of the governor of the state as enshrined under section 177 of the 1999 constitution.”

It added, that “the academic qualifications required of any governorship candidate as captured under section 177 (d) is a school certificate which has been interpreted under section 318 of the 1999 constitutions of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 2011 as amended.

“NYSC discharged certificate is not a qualification as captured under the aforementioned section of the constitution and therefore, cannot disqualify any person who has met the constitutional requirements and has been duly elected into the office of the governor of a state,” the court held.

On the preliminary objections raised by the respondents through their counsel on the ground that the Labour Party governorship candidate, Chijioke Jonathan Edoga lacked the locus standi to challenge the election of Peter Mbah not being a member of PDP, the tribunal held that Chijioke Jonathan Edoga has the locus standi having participated in the primary election conducted by the 3rd Respondent (PDP) and was aggrieved by the outcome.

The tribunal also held that a lawsuit on the non-qualification of a candidate in an election can’t be instituted as both a pre-election matter as well as at the tribunal. It consequently dismissed the objection raised by the respondents.

The tribunal had earlier, stuck out the testimonies of the petitioner’s witness who was the NYSC’s director of certification, Abdullah Mohammed who testified against the the 2nd respondent, Peter Mbah.

The testimonies of PW 2, 3, 4, and 26 who were star witnesses of the petitioners on the ground that their respective witnesses’ deposition on oath were not filed within 21 days as provided for under the constitution as well as the Electoral Act.

The Tribunal relied on the decision of the Presidential Election Petition Court decision which was recently decided in the case of Peter Gregory Obi V INEC and Anor and held that their testimonies held no water as they were not competent to testify in the tribunal having not complied with the provisions of the relevant laws.

Dismissing the first ground of the petition, the tribunal held that section 182 (1) (j) of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which provides for the disqualification of a governorship candidate who has submitted a forged certificate to INEC should not be read in isolation but should be read in conjunction with section 177 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which provides for the qualifications.

On ground two of the petition which deals with whether or not Peter Mbah was validly elected having not scored the highest number of votes, the court held that the petitioners’ witnesses were not competent before the tribunal having not complied with the provisions of the Electoral Act which mandated that political parties should submit the names, addresses and two passport photographs of the party agents to INEC.

According to the tribunal, none of the witnesses complied with this provision of the law and therefore are incompetent to testify. Their witness’s deposition on oath as well as their oral evidence were expunged from the record of the tribunal.

Consequently, the tribunal resolved the second ground in favour of the respondents.

Some of the witnesses’ testimonies like that of Casimir Agbo who is the Labour Party state chairman were held as hearsay evidence and were discountenanced by the tribunal for lacking in merit.

On the third ground of the petition which bothered non-compliance with the electoral act provisions, manifest corruption, over-voting, and incorrect computation of the results of the candidates in some polling units in Igbo Eze North, Udenu, Enugu East, and Nkanu East Local Government areas, the tribunal held that some petitioners’ witnesses did not sign the result sheets emanating from these polling units and therefore, incompetent to testify before the tribunal.

Subsequently, their testimonies were discountenanced and marked rejected.

However, at a polling unit in Amagu Ugbawka Nkanu East local government area, the court held that the petitioners’ witness proved over-voting and therefore, the result obtained from those polling units were cancelled and deducted from the total number of votes garnered by the two contending candidates, Chijioke Edeoga and Peter Mbah.

This deduction reduced the votes of Peter Mbah to 160, 567 from 160, 844 and that of Edeoga was reduced to 157, 555.

Supreme Court Affirms Peter Mbah as Enugu Governor