Governor Olusegun Mimiko |
The
petition, which was filed on behalf of the candidates by their councel, Mr.
Segun Ogodo, at the state Election Petitions Tribunal, has as respondents,
Mimiko, the LP, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the
Resident Electoral Commissioner in the state, Mr. Akin Orebiyi, and the
Returning Officer, Prof Biyi Daramola.
The filling
of the petition has brought to five, the number of petitions filed against the
return of Mimiko by the INEC as the winner of the election.
Meanwhile,
the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) has come under scathing criticism from the
state chapter of LP over its remarks in the media following its challenge of
Mimiko’s victory.
The party
said the ACN could not approbate and reprobate at the same time.
The ACN had
last Sunday, through its media assistant, Mr. Idowu Ajanaku, attempted to
rationalise the reasons the party was in court, mentioning allegations
bordering on criminal practices against both the LP and INEC which they
insisted resulted in the victory of Mimiko.
However,
the LP in a statement yesterday berated the ACN, saying once matters are in
court, it becomes subjudice and should not be a subject of media analysis as
the ACN has now turned the matter into, adding, that these antics would not
favour them at the tribunal.
According
to the LP’s Publicity Secretary, Mr Femi Okunjemiruwa, “the position of the law
is that once a matter is in court, nobody should comment on it in the media as
the ACN is now doing. If you go to court with weighty allegations as the ones
being made by the party, it behoves on you to be ready to prove these
allegations rather than resorting to media rigmarole as the ACN is trying to
do, they ought to be aware of the legal maxim which says he who alleges must
prove.”
The LP
spokesperson while stating that even from the tirades of the ACN as enunciated
by its media manager, it was obvious that they were a bunch of confused people
merely out to play mischief rather than be serious at the tribunal.
His words:
“while we are not going to join issues with those who are, from all intent and
purposes, not ready to subject themselves to the rule of the court considering
their posturing in the last few months before, during and after the election,
we would like to say that some of the issues raised were pre-election matters
and not election matters.
“The rule
is that since they have gone to court, they should allow the court to
adjudicate of the matter rather than trying to play media stunts with all these
phantom allegations which they should be prepared to substantiate rather than
resorting to a fly in the ointment tactics which failed them during the
election.”
No comments:
Post a Comment