Tribunal Set To Pronounce Actual Winner Of Osun Gov Poll, To Communicate Date



The Osun Election Tribunal sitting in Osogbo, has reserved judgement in the petition filed by former Governor Gboyega Oyetola to challenge the outcome of July, 2022 governorship election.



The tribunal, led by Justice Tetsea Kume, late Friday admitted the written addresses of the parties involved in the litigation.

Counsel for All Progressives Congress, (APC), Adegboyega Oyetola, and those of Senator Ademola Adeleke, the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) and the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC),  argued and adopted their final written addresses before the Tribunal.

This is even as Counsel for Oyetola  Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, insisted that Senator Adeleke submitted forged certificates, having submitted a Testimonial purported to have been issued by Ede Muslim Grammar School, bearing Osun State at a time Osun had not been created and another letter of Attestation from Ede Muslim High School, to indicate he attended a secondary school.



The petitioners insisted that if the governor had indeed attended Ede Muslim Grammar School, he could not have presented an Attestation Letter from Ede Muslim High School to show he attended a secondary school.

In his own argument, Counsel for INEC, Prof. Paul Ananaba, submitted that there were discrepancies in 1,750 polling units, saying that results of elections are updated on a continuous basis.

He said as at the time the first CTC BVAS report was issued to the petitioners, some “data were still hanging” and that it was the second CTC BVAS report which was synchronised that should be relied upon by the Tribunal.



Counsel for Adeleke Onyeachi Ikpeazu, SAN, disowned INEC’s second CTC BVAS report, a document relied upon by INEC at the Tribunal to defend its declaration of Senator Adeleke as the winner of the July 16 governorship election.

Ikpeazu noted that a clear distinction ought to be maintained between back-end server and the Certified Copy of the extraction from the BVAS machines.

“Contrary to the submission of the Petitioners, RWl confirmed a physical inspection of the BVAS based on the Order of Court for same to be extracted. It is on this pedestal that the case of the 2nd Respondent (Adeleke) was mounted.

“2nd Respondent (Adeleke) is not bound by the case of the 1st Respondent (INEC) which was found as the second BVAS report which was labelled synchronised but which was not a comprehensive one from the BVAS machines themselves.



Fagbemi had earlier said: “I state that it is only Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that is given statutory responsibility to conduct election. I submit that where there is allegation on conduct of election, it is only INEC that has the responsibility to show otherwise.

“The grouse of the petitioners with respect to these grounds, are on the conduct of the election. I submit further that the attempt by 2nd Respondent to discredit Exhibit R.BVR should be discountenance as stated by the 2nd respondent (Adeleke.)



“I submit that we are in a completely new electoral dispensation, unless we know this, we will just be wallowing. I started with concept of over-voting, is different in the present legal regime from the previous legal regime.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More