A witness for the Social Democratic Party, SDP, at the Ekiti State Governorship Election Tribunal, Folasade Imade, has told the tribunal that her voter’s card was rejected by the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, BVAS, machine at the last June 20 election because the card showed two human heads.
The made the declaration on Monday at the continuation of hearing by the three-member panel of judges led by Justice Abubakar Idris Kutigi during a proceeding that witnessed some drama by the witnesses and hot exchanges among the counsels in the suit.
The SDP which scored 179 votes at the June 20 governorship election is challenging the return of Governor Biodun Oyebanji of the All Progressives Congress, APC, by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
The APC polled 319,224 votes to win re-election at the poll.
The witnesses were led in their examination-in-chief by the SDP counsel, Nnamdi Chukwudebelu, and were cross-examined by INEC counsel, Sulaiman Ibrahim, SAN and counsel to Oyebanji, Adetunji Oso, SAN.
Under cross-examination, an SDP witness, Imade, admitted that her voter’s card was rejected by the BVAS machine because the card had two heads in the voter’s photograph box in the document which made the electoral officers to ask her to stay aside because of the anomaly discovered.
Imade, who told the tribunal that the incident happened at her polling unit in Odo Ayedun in Ikole local government area, also admitted not knowing the petitioner in the case for which she came to the court to give evidence.
The witness who alleged in her witness statement on oath that N15,000 was shared at the unit later contradicted her evidence by admitting under cross-examination that she couldn’t have known the amount allegedly shared because she didn’t count the money to know the exact amount.
Seyi Alade while testifying for SDP caused a stir when she told the court that she deposed to her witness statement on oath three years ago when the actual date on the document showed that the deposition was done on July 11, 2026.
Attempts by the petitioner’s counsel, Chukwudebelu, to allow the witness correct herself after the testimony had been recorded by judges and suggesting answers to them, were resisted by respondents’ counsel and also rejected by the three-member panel.
The chairman of the panel, Justice Kutigi, maintained that the witness responded to the hearing of the court on that line of evidence and what Chukwudebelu was attempting to do amounted to “leading evidence from the Bar.”
During the evidence of the witnesses, Chukwudebelu disrupted the flow of proceedings several times by suggesting to the panel the way and manner the judges should make their records and witnesses to give evidence according to his dictates.
They warned Chukwudebelu against any act that was unacceptable in the prosecution of the petition advising the lawyer to encourage his witness to listen to questions asked them, speak audibly and give answers to the best of their abilities.
At least on three occasions, Justice Kutigi and another member of the panel, Justice Maurice Okediya asked Chukwudebelu to sit down as the business of the tribunal could not be conducted on the whims and caprices of the counsel but in accordance with the law.
Justice Kutigi said: “As much as we want to accommodate you, don’t play with us here. The witness never said he didn’t understand what he is doing. Let him answer us, if they want to keep quiet, we will record that they kept mute. You cannot interject and try to do the business the way you want.
“You have to behave yourself, you have to be careful, we are not kids and you have to conduct yourself as a knowledgeable member of the Bar because we are not here to play to the gallery. You cannot come here and intimidate anybody.
“It is not for you to say ‘record what I say and don’t record that.’ All of us on this panel are over 30 years at the Bar, we are not kids. The court is a public place and everybody is watching and we have rules that guide us.
“Do you want to lead evidence from the Bar? What does cross-examination entail? Let us teach you, do you have Evidence Act? There is no law that says he cannot be cross-examined on his deposition on oath. Let us do things that will allow us make progress in this case.”
Another SDP witness, Comfort Obafemi, under cross-examination admitted that there was no picture on her party membership card.
She claimed that she wrote her witness statement on oath by herself.
Other witnesses who testified in support of SDP included Joseph Tola, Christiana Akinyemi, Bosede Apara and Funke Alakuro who recanted a certain paragraph of her deposition in her witness statement on oath which she described as a “lie” while responding to a question from respondent’s counsel.
READ ALSO:
JAMB announces restoration of CAPS, tasks schools on admission
DSS arraigns IPOB members allegedly linked to killing of operative
2027: ADC candidates in four states defect to APC, back Tinubu
Tinubu hale and hearty, will return to Nigeria this week -Presidency
NAPTIP uncovers suspected baby trafficking ring in C’River
APC sweeps Enugu council polls
Barry’s veto saves three as BBNaija Season 11 names final 10
Shettima returns to Nigeria after UNGA81
NNPC, NLNG, Customs, Dangote, others partner with GOCOP for 2026 conference
