The Ogun State Governorship Election Tribunal sitting in Abeokuta has struck out the petition by the Labour Party against the victory of Governor Dapo Abiodun of the All Progressives Congress, APC, in the last election.
The Labour Party based its complaint on alleged unlawful exclusion of its candidate from the governorship election in the state by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
The tribunal struck out the case following the absence of the Labour Party in court.
Its counsel was also absent.
In the judgement, the tribunal also awarded a N500,000 fine against Labour Party.
The fine, it ruled, should be paid to Dapo Abiodun.
Governor Abiodun has reacted to the judgement, saying it was a confirmation that the people of the state truly voted for him.
In a statement issued by his Chief Press Secretary, Mr. Kunle Somorin, on Friday, he was quoted as saying that he believed that should put an end to the petition.
His words: “The people spoke with their votes on March 9 and today the Tribunal confirmed it. That is democracy at work. So, I believe that puts an end to the petition and we pray that petition will rest in perfect peace.
“Now, we expect all political parties and other purpose-driven stakeholders to join hands with us to build our future together.”
Prof Taiwo Osipitan who is the lead counsel to Governor Dapo Abiodun, spoke on the case.
According to him, the petitioner had based “their argument for nonappearance on a letter written to the Court of Appeal asking for the case to be transferred which was rejected by the Tribunal.”
Osipitan explained: “We joined issues with them that they have no candidates so to say or that the nominations of the candidate were not lawful and therefore INEC was right in not listing their candidate for the election. But, after we had filed all our papers, today (Friday) was fixed for the hearing, for the case to commence, neither the petitioner, that is, the candidate of the party, nor their counsel was in court.
“They predicated their absence on a letter they wrote to the president of the court of appeal, asking for the case to be transferred. We felt that is not a reason why they should not be in court at all, that even if they have any issues, they should come to court and say it out loud and clear.
“At any rate, we looked at the provisions of the law that say that when a case is fixed for hearing and the petitioner is not in court, then we as respondents are entitled to judgement dismissing the case and once it is dismissed, there is no room for it to be re-listed.
“So we invoked that provision and applied to the tribunal that the petition be dismissed for want of diligent persecution because they were absent in court.”