The Bayelsa State Governorship Tribunal has denied the request of the All Progressive Congress and its candidate in the state governorship election held last November, Timipre Sylva, asking the panel to halt the ongoing hearing in their challenge against the victory of the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Duoye Diri.

The chairman of the tribunal panel, Justice Adekunle Adeleye, made this declaration after listening to the motion and arguments from the counsel of the APC and its candidate, stating that the Court of Appeal has asked the tribunal to proceed with the hearing regardless of the petition filed against the tribunal.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has declared Governor Duoye Diri of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and his deputy, Lawrence Ewhrujakpo, as the winners of the off-cycle election after scoring 175, 196 votes to defeat his closest rival, the APC candidate, Timipre Sylva, who had 110,108 votes.

Not satisfied with the outcome of the poll, the APC and its candidate approached the tribunal to upturn the result of the poll and nullify Diri’s victory over the allegations that the governorship election was disrupted by violence in three local government areas of the state, namely Ogbia, Nembe, and Southern Ijaw local government areas of Bayelsa State.

Having called 52 witnesses to make cases on their allegations of electoral malpractices they levelled against Mr Diri and the electoral commission during the November polls, Mr Sylva and his party closed their case.

However, there was a turn of events last week when the chairman of the panel announced that the APC and its candidate had filed a petition against the tribunal on the ground that the tribunal was biased, questioning the panel members’ neutrality on the case.

In addition, Mr. Sylva and his party demanded that the state governorship electoral tribunal be dissolved due to alleged inconsistencies, arguing that the tribunal had violated their constitutional right to a fair hearing.

The petition filed against the tribunal also claimed that the court only allowed the complainant to call 8 witnesses to the stand instead of the agreed-upon 25, forcing them to close their case earlier than anticipated, adding that

“It is obvious from the forgoing that the petitioners cannot get justice from the Tribunal as presently constituted, since it is obvious that the tribunal Chairman has descended into the arena of the legal conflict between the parties”

As a result, the tribunal was forced to go into indefinite adjournment pending the reactions of the Court of Appeal to the petition filed.

However, the respondents disagreed with the complainants’ request that the panel members recuse themselves, claiming that it was an attempt to prevent them from defending the case. They also defended the panel members for adhering to the rules established during the case’s preliminary hearing.

Judge Adeleye announced that the hearing would continue on March 13 and 14 so that INEC could present and conclude its defense after receiving a favorable response from the court of appeals.