The five-man panel of the reconstituted Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Asaba, the Delta State capital, chaired by Justice B.S. Mohammed yesterday quashed the petition brought before it by Chief Great Ogboru that challenged the election of Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan.

Justice Mohammed while delivering the 20-page judgment ruled that Ogboru who contested the 2007 governorship election on the platform of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP) failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the election was fraught with irregularities.

“This issue is hereby resolved in favour of the respondent. In consequence of the finding above, this petition fails and is therefore hereby dismissed,” said Mohammed. But Ogboru, who spoke through his younger brother, Mr. Tunna Ogboru, shortly after the judgment, described it as a “miscarriage of justice."

According to him, “this is another Asaba judgment. We are going to challenge that judgment at the Appeal Court. We will fight until we get justice.”

Ogboru, whose petition was dismissed by the previous tribunal chaired by Justice Lokulo Shodikpe, had asked the tribunal to nullify the election of Uduaghan, arguing that the poll conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was characterized by rigging and ballot box stuffing.

The petitioner had stated that “the purported election said to have taken place on April 14th 2007 did not hold in all the 25 local government areas in that electoral materials did not get to the various local government areas, words and polling units to declare Uduaghan as winner.”

He added that the election was “contrived with rigging, manipulation and corruption”.

Ogboru also prayed the tribunal among others “for an order on 3rd and 4th respondents (INEC) to conduct fresh election for the governorship office in Delta State devoid of corrupt practices and an order nullifying the governorship election purportedly held in Delta State on 14th April 2007 including returns made thereto”.

Justice Mohammed averred that the burden of proof lies with the petitioners to show that the election did not take place. He said the court could not adduce evidence to prove that there was no voting in the state, adding that the argument of the petitioner appeared not to have met the required standard of law.

Mohammed also pointed out that there was discrepancy in the statement of oath tendered by the prosecution witness as it appeared that it was not made by the deponents as was made by their lawyers.

According to him, “the petitioners were given all the opportunity to prove their cases in the open court but then this can hardly be said to be the fault of the respondents. The petition had been riddled with bundle of missed opportunities by the petitioners that if taken at the appropriate time may have swung the petition to their advantage.

“They failed to conduct thorough interview of their witnesses and take their statement on oath in a manner that will not attract suspicious pre-trail statement and finally they failed to cease the opportunity of tendering from the bar all the electoral materials they subpoenaed the respondent to produce, which in fact they produced twice at the tribunal.

“They even failed to cease the opportunity offered them by this tribunal to sort out the electoral documents in open court and tender those relevant to their cases but they rather preferred to apply for discharge of the document and latter found themselves in a tight corner. If only the petitioner had properly followed their lead, we may have been singing a different tune today but they did not.”

On whether the tribunal has the power to entertain the case, the judge answered in the positive saying “the court of Appeal ruled that it has authority to entertain the matter on its merits.”

Reacting to the judgment, counsel to Ogboru , Mr. Nichols Icheor, said: “It’s the judgment of the court of law. Having regard to the need to defer to the process, we are bound by the judgment. Definitely, I am sure the petitioners will take a closer look at the judgment and decide what to do from here.”

Counsel to Uduaghan, Babiru Turaki, described the judgment as sound comprehensive and dispassionate.

Commissioner for information, Mr. Oma Djebah said the tribunal’s verdict was a vindication of the position that had been maintained from the beginning, that the election was overwhelmingly won by Uduaghan.

Also speaking on the issue, Secretary of State Government, Dr. Ifeanyi Okowa, said: “Right from the beginning, we know that they had no case; they thought they had to start dragging that state up and down. From the election, it was obvious that there was only one party in the state.”