*Declared more votes than accredited voters
*Failed to interrogate evidences
*Avoided mentioning figures in written judgment
By Myke Uzendu
Facts have emerged that the Supreme Court failed to do foul-proof mathematical computation of the results of votes cast at the election, but relied only on the data personally compiled and submitted by Sen. Hope Uzodinma to declare him duly-elected governor of Imo State.
Our correspondents who obtained a copy of the certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal filed at the Supreme Court by Sen. Uzodunma and the All Progressives Congress (APC), which was issued by Nwana Ejike, Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Owerri, from an earlier record compiled by Ibrahim Garba, Secretary of the Imo State Election Petition Tribunal, observed that there were obvious mathematical and factual inconsistencies which the apex court waved aside.
It should be recalled that at the Governorship Election Tribunal, Sen. Uzodinma had from pages 9 to 27 of his petition drawn a table of votes allocation which he claimed were the figures obtained from the duplicate copies of Forms EC8A handed over to his party agents at the 388 polling units, which he claimed results were excluded in the overall result of the election.
From the table he compiled from the 388 polling units, there were 252,452 registered voters, who gave the APC 213,695 votes, and 1,903 to Hon. Emeka Ihedioha, the governorship candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP).
The table did not indicate the total number of accredited voters, nor the number of invalid votes, if any, and the votes allocated to the remaining 68 candidates that contested the election, aside from Uzodinma and Ihedioha.
However, an analysis of the duplicate Forms EC8A tendered by PW54, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Rabiu Hussein, there were no fewer than six polling units where more votes were recorded above the registered voters.
For instance, on figure number 69 which showed votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the total registered voters was put at 492, whereas the table showed that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP, 7 votes, providing 334 more votes than the registered voters, even without including the votes polled by the other candidates at the election.
Also, at page 22 of the petition referencing polling unit 282, the registered voters was put at 591, whereas the tabulation showed that APC polled 586 votes and PDP 9 votes, with a total of 4 votes more than the registered voters, not including votes scored by the other candidates.
Similarly, at the same page 22 of the record, polling unit 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered voters, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with 4 votes, providing a total of 335 votes above the actual total registered voters at the unit.
In addition, figures obtained from page 79 of the record of appeal under item 384, APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with 2 votes, and total votes cast totalling 526, which is two votes above total registered voters in the area.
Both the EPT and the Appeal Court dismissed the petition for lacking in merit
But in a unanimous judgment delivered on 14th January and the 45-page judgment read by Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunmbo Kekere-Ekun, the Supreme Court upturned the two lower courts’ decisions and declared Sen. Uzodinma of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as duly-elected governor of Imo State.
The court said that votes from the disputed 388 polling units were wrongly excluded from the scores ascribed to Sen. Uzodinma, which was then added.
By relying on the faulty tabulation made by Sen. Uzodinma, the Supreme Court arrived at a figure of 950,952 votes, which is more than the 823,743 votes cast at the election, leading to 127,209 excess votes as affirmed by the Supreme Court.
It was also noticed that the Supreme Court avoided mentioning figures or votes cast in the judgment obtained by our correspondent, yet decided on disputed figures.
In the second order made in the judgment, Justice Kekere-Ekun simply declared: “It is hereby ordered that the appelllants’ votes from the 388 polling units unlawfully excluded from the appellants’ score shall be added to the figure declared by the 3rd respondent (INEC)” and orders that he be immediately sworn-in.
