“THERE WAS A GRAVE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. WE ARE CHALLENGING THE QUALIFICATION OF PDP AND GOV. MUTFWANG AND NOT THEIR CONGRESS”. APC, DR. NENTAWE, STATE ON APPEAL

By: Valentine Adese (JP),

Not being satisfied with the Judgment of the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal Panel that sat in Jos, Plateau State, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its governorship candidate, Dr Nentawe Yilwtda in the 18^th March, 20203 election have approached the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, stating that there was a grave miscarriage of Justice in the Judgment delivered by the Panel.

Nentawe disclosed in his Appeal that he is not challenging the procedures for the purported PDP congress, but the non-qualification of Mutfwang to contest the election having not been duly sponsored.

He argued that, having been duly established in accordance with the extant orders of the Plateau State High Court through documentary evidence and oral testimonies of his witnesses, his petition is hinged on the validity or otherwise of the repeated congress of the 25th September 2021.

The appellant further argued that the Judgments of the Court of Appeal in respect of PDP’s congresses have not been altered, and as such, the decisions ought to be binding on the Tribunal in arriving at its conclusion.

In the Notice of Appeal filed by his Counsel, Professor Kayode Olatoke (SAN), Nentawe claims that the Tribunal in striking out his witnesses’ statements on oath and documents presented, were in clear breach of his right to fair hearing and fair trial.

According to Nentawe in a press statement signed by Shittu Bamaiyi, the candidate in his Appeal stated that “It was wrong to hold that Emmanuel Go’ar and Emmanuel Macham are not witnesses of the Tribunal but his own”.

Adding that, “The Tribunal came to a wrong conclusion in that decision because “The two mentioned persons were subpoenaed witnesses.

Explain that, “The two witnesses could not have gone to the court to give evidence, without being compelled by the order of the Tribunal to do so, while further pointing out that the two persons are not members of his political party, but that of PDP.

According to him, the fact that the two witnesses were issued with subpoena to attend the Tribunal upon his request, it did not vitiate the fact that they were witnesses of the Tribunal.

Nentawe maintained that Messrs Go’ar and Macham were subpoenaed as adversaries, whose witness depositions cannot accompany his petition as wrongly held by the Tribunal.

He argued that subpoenaed witnesses are regulated by the provisions of the Electoral Act, and the Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2019.

He further submitted that the period of 21 days within which an election petition must be filed does not apply to the two subpoenaed witnesses.

The Appellant stated that the Tribunal misconceived his unique case, in challenging the sponsorship of Caleb Mutfwang to contest the governorship election.

TO BE CONTINUED…