The Governorship Election Petition Tribunal in Abeokuta has rejected the request by Mr. Gordy Uche, SAN, counsel to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), to reexamine a witness due to inconsistencies discovered in her statement.
The PDP had presented Mrs. Shittu Omobolanle, from Makun, Sagamu, as a witness to testify in favor of the party regarding her experience in the gubernatorial poll held on March 18, 2023.
However, discrepancies arose when it was found that the witness stated her polling unit number as 27-20-14-020 in her statement, while her voter’s card indicated 27-20-14-004 as her polling unit number.
During the cross-examination, Counsel to Governor Abiodun, Kehinde Ogunwunmiju, SAN, highlighted the discrepancy in the witness’s documents, specifically the polling unit numbers. In response, Gordy Uche SAN, the petitioners’ counsel, sought the opportunity for reexamination to clarify the inconsistencies.
Uche SAN argued that reexamination should be allowed as per the Evidence Act and relevant authorities, citing the need for the witness to explain the reasons behind the conflicting numbers.
However, counsels representing the respondents objected to the request, asserting that there was no ambiguity in the documents. They referred to legal authorities, including a Supreme Court case, Natasha v The State, to support their argument that reexamination can only be permitted if there is an ambiguity in the issue under consideration.
In response to the objection, Uche SAN conceded that reexamination is indeed limited to ambiguities but argued that the disparities in the witness’s statements constituted an ambiguity within the meaning of the Evidence Act.
In clarification, Ogunwumiju SAN stated that the issue at hand was not an ambiguity but rather a contradiction by the witness. He invoked legal authorities and judicial decisions defining ambiguity as unclear answers. Ogunwumiju SAN emphasized that reexamination should not be used to rectify faulty evidence provided by a witness. Counsel to the APC, Chief Afolabi Fashanu SAN, supported Ogunwumiju’s position and urged the Tribunal to acknowledge that documents speak for themselves. Both counsels urged the tribunal to reject the plea for reexamination as presented by the petitioners’ counsel.
The tribunal agreed with the respondents’ lawyers in its ruling, concluding that the matter was unambiguous and, therefore, rejected the request for reexamination as requested by the PDP.
In a related development, similarities were also discovered in the statements submitted to the tribunal by Omobolanle and another PDP witness from Ikenne, Awotubo Olalekan, when compared with previously submitted witness statements before the panel.