The National Asrmbly Election Petition Tribunal sitting at Federal High Court Jos, the Plateau State capital has reserved judgment on Petition filed by Nde David Shifkfu Parradang the former Immigration Boss, against INEC, Hezekiah Dimka, and the APC challenging the declaration of Hezekiah Dimka as Senator Elect for Plateau Central Senatorial Zone.Tribunal has since adopted the written addresses of all Counsel involved in matter.The Petition number EPT/NA/SEN/11/2019, Counsel to the 1st Respondent INEC began with application to file 3 processes in their final written adresses reply to Petitioners and authority dated 2nd August, 2019 which the Tribunal granted the application.Even though, the 1st Respondent urged that Tribunal hold all submissions of the Petitioners Counsel and called for the dismissal of Petitioner’s case claiming that, the Petitioner’s evidences before the court were not substantial enough to hold ground, because the Petitioners did not file their case on time and witness who testified before the court was not part of the Petitioner’s list of witnesses.The Tribunal noted the 1st Respondent’s move and asked “By your contention, when did 3rd Respondent filed their submissions, by your contention, when did his ten days elapsed, why would it not be applied to others, why would you want to take benefits of issues of orders of the Court while you think same should not be applied to others”?Counsel to Hezekiah Dimka opposed the 1st Respondents’ move saying, “my Lords, we all consented and the move should be discontinued the issue as raised by the 1st Respondent” the 1st Respondent applied to abandon same and was granted.Concerning some issues raised by the Respondents Counsel to discredit the Petitioners final written addresses from been adopted which bordered on witneses testifying without been listed, document tendered without receipt, among others.Petitioner’s Counsel countered all referring Tribunal to appropriate authorities Belgore -vs- Ahmad 2013, precedence of the supreme Court.The Petitioners’ counsel also based his arguments on the fact that his filed written addresses were within time in response to the Respondents case in the matter.Regards to the respondents claims of non payment of receipts shown by the Petitioners to authenticate the genuineness of their Exhibit Documents obtained from the INEC, The Petitioners said each of the documents attached on it were evidences of payment which were signed and stamped by INEC and the 1st Respondents did Confirmed same to be Documents certified by INEC before they were been adopted and admitted by the Tribunal.Concerning 2nd Respondent Counsel ,Garba Pwul’s calls for dismissal of David Paradang’s petition where he claimed that, “petitioners have failed to prove how they were shortchanged of over 1000 votes in the five Local Governments that made up the Plateau Central Senatorial Zone constituency, Mangu, Bokkos, Pankshin, Kanke and Kanam LGAs, submitting that, two LGAs were not mentioned to proof their aligations of lumped sum votes ommission”Pwul also argued that “the Petitioner’s claims of over-voting is contrary to the definition of over-voting as prescribed in the Sec. 53(2) of the electoral act, hence submitted that, tendering of voter’s Register is a critical evidence in this case he said”He further stated that, the Respondents having failed to scale down votes scored by both Petitioners and respondents in the matter, cannot be declared winners of the Elections , referring Tribunal to the case of Jang -vs-Dariye 2003.Cousel to the Petitioners on their part said, ” Petitioners filed written addresses on July 26th, 2019 encompassing issues of notes concerning this matter and urged the Tribunal that, they have come to adopt same, where they have clearly stated in the document how they were denied one thousand votes in Kanam Local Government AreaThe Petitioners Counsel told the Court , “legally tendered and admitted Exhibit P3 form EC8A of same and was confirmed by the Coalltion officer of the same kanam local Government Area Tolulokpe Okpe.The best evidence has been tendered and Respondents does not need a revotal evidence to aid the basis of our support”He stressed that, “the facts and evidences laid by the Petitioners in the Petitions particulars has clearly support the aligations of corrupt practices and none compliance with Electoral act. This could be granted without that calculation, based on facts and evidences laid ”The Petitioner through his Counsel also said “regarding councelations of two Polling units in Kanam Local Government Area, forms EC8A has been clearly explained by the Petitioners own witnesesand there was no contradictory evidences that results of those units were cancelled by their Presiding officers”He backed his argument on that note with S:54(2).Petitioners further said they adopt all their Documents tendered before the Tribunal in support of their Petitions and prayed that the Tribunal grants all relief sought in the Petitions.Having listrned to the arguments yhe tribunal reserves judgment on Petition for a date to be communicated to the parties.
Nasarawa Reporters 