The candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the Lagos state governorship election, Abdulazeez Olajide Adediran, popularly known as Jandor has testified asking for the disqualification of the candidates of the All Progressives Congress, Babajide Sanwo-Olu and that of the Labour Party, Gbadebo Rhoades-Vivour for non-compliance with the guidelines of the Independent National Electoral Commission

Defending his petition marked EPT/LAG/GOV/01/2023 at the state governorship election petition tribunal on Monday, in which the INEC, Sanwo-Olu and Obafemi Hamzat, of the All Progressives Congress, Gbadebo Rhoades, and the Labour Party are the 1st to 6th respondents, respectively, Jandor, claimed that Sanwo-Olu and his deputy were not properly sponsored by their party, adding that Gbadebo Rhoades was ineligible because the Labour Party had not properly sponsored his nomination as the candidate in the poll.

Mr Adediran also prayed the tribunal to disqualify Mr Sanwo-Olu for failing to submit a copy of his GCE ‘O’ level results with his Form EC9 as required by the electoral law. He also claimed that during the governor’s first term, he had submitted a falsified statement of results.

The petitioner’s lawyer, Austin Akpomreta, provided form EC9, Ec8, copies of the WAEC results, and other relevant documents in addition to his client’s sworn oath, who served as the main witness. Jandor attested to the witness statement given to him during his testimony today as a star witness, saying he added to his witness oath five times to present specific evidence to the tribunal.

In his testimony, he claimed that he went to the West African Examination Council’s official website to confirm the authenticity of Sanwo-Olu’s result. He found that the page responded with “error,” and he was then forwarded to another page that verified the governor’s result was invalid.

He also claimed that both Sanwo-Olu and Gbadebo Rhoades did not follow the electoral acts to be properly sponsored by their political parties “Sponsorship means that a party has sponsored a candidate after fulfilling the electoral acts that preceded the sponsorship of that candidate in a general election, meaning that the law has been strictly adhered. the process of that led to the sponsorship/ nomination of Sanwo-Olu and his deputy by their party was unlawful”, he alleged

In response to Jandor’s claim, Muiz Banire, the counsel for Mr. Sanwo-Olu and his assistant, the second and third respondents, questioned the witness about his prior employment with WAEC or INEC, asserting that since he has not worked with either of these organizations, it would be difficult for him to claim the governor’s secondary school result was falsified. He also claimed that the petitioner did not attend the same secondary school as the 2nd respondent, doubting the accuracy of his claims.

Similarly, the counsel for the fourth respondent, the All Progressives Congress’s lawyer, Norrisson Quakers (SAN), argued that the petition failed to mention sponsorship in his written witness statement. He also added that the petitioner is not privy to the internal affairs of the APC, so he could not have known if his definition of sponsorship between the party and his governorship candidate was properly followed.

In the same vein, the 5th and 6th respondents also objected to the petitioner’s claim about his knowledge of the Labour Party and its internal affairs, they further told the tribunal to present more of their objections in their final written address.

Speaking with journalists after the sitting, Austin Akpomreta, the counsel to the PDP governorship noted that the petitioner is challenging the elections on viable grounds, adding that he has submitted every relevant document to justify his claims to the tribunal.

“We have brought our star witness today to seek the disqualification of the candidate,date and the hearing has commenced, the cross-examination has been done and there was nothing else to reexamine.

“The highlight of what we did in court today is that several documents were admitted, while the few that were objected to having been asked to be addressed in the final address. All our documents were submitted based on the standard. One of the purposes of challenging the results of the election is because the person must be qualified, that is a very serious ground while we are contesting the election and the result”, he concluded