The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja, yesterday, reserved judgment in three separate appeals challenging the victory of Emeka Ihedioha in the March 9 governorship election in Imo State.
The five member panel presided over by Justice Oyebisi Omoleye, announced that judgment in the three appeals would be delivered on a date to be communicated to parties, after parties in the various appeals adopted their written addresses as brief of argument in the appeals.
The appeals were filed against the judgment of the Imo Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which upheld the election of Ihedioha.
It includes that of the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) and his governorship candidate, Senator Ifeanyi Ararume; Action Alliance (AA) and his governorship candidate, Uche Nwosu and that of the All Progressive Congress (APC) and its governorship candidate, Sen. Hope Uzodinma.
The appellants are asking the appellate court to void the election of Ihedioha on grounds that he did not obtain the constitutional one quarter of the votes in at least two-thirds of the 27 local government areas of the state, in line with Section 179 of the Constitution.
In their various submissions by their counsel, the appellants are asking the court to set aside the decision of the tribunal and declare them winner of the March 9 governorship election.
Also in the alternative order the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to conduct a fresh election into the office of Governor of Imo State.
The three-member panel of the tribunal had in a unanimous decison delivered on Sept. 21, held that Ihedioha was lawfully declared winner of the governorship election by INEC.
The panel chaired by Justice Malami Dongondaji, had in the judgment dismissed Ararume, Nwosu and Uzodinma’s petitions for lacking in merit on the grounds that they failed to prove allegations made in their petitions.
They claimed that Ihedioha did not obtain the constitutional one quarter of the votes in at least two-thirds of the 27 local government areas of the state, in line with the provisions of the law.
The petitioners also alleged substantially of non compliance with the Electoral Act and Guidelines, including other irregularities.