Mike Edikan, Uyo

Dr Godswill Akpabio's defeat at the 2019 general elections is nearing permanence as proceedings at the Election Petition Tribunal so far has been a confirmation of his loss at the elections rather than a pointer to the possibility of his return to the National Assembly.

The former Governor of Akwa Ibom state and immediate past Senator representing Akwa Ibom North West Senatorial District at the National Assembly was defeated by Senator Christopher Ekpenyong in what commentaries have described as the "uncommon defeat" of the 2019 elections. The former Senator who even after defeat has not embraced the reality of his loss was among the first to file processes at the National Assembly Election Petitions Tribunal in Akwa Ibom State in his efforts to reclaim his mandate which in his word, was stolen. Senator Ekpenyong had long been sworn-in as the incumbent Senator representing Akwa Ibom North West Senatorial District at the National Assembly.

Without a doubt, Akapbio's journey to the Tribunal was to avert what many have considered as his rather untimely exit from political relevance, the result of his ill-conceived decision to "move" from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressive Congress. About three months into the Tribunal, there is no scent of hope for Akpabio. The proceedings may in no time end just as his first suit at the Federal High Court, seeking to restrain INEC from issuing the Certificate of return to Senator Ekpenyong ended, a futile attempt at nothing.

At the pre-trial stage of the petition, the Respondents brought an application asking for Akpabio's petition to be dismissed for being incompetent. The grounds were that Akpabio had asked for the impossible; in the petition, he stated that the election was illegal being fraught with violence and corrupt practices and unfortunately went on to ask that he be declared the winner of the elections. With common sense, one can see the ridicule in this scenario, if the election was illegal, how then does he claim to be declared winner from such illegal elections? In the arguments to this application, Akpabio's counsel submitted that the petition only challenges the return of Senator Ekpenyong and not the elections, that it is the return that is illegal and not the elections. This is where the shock began, how do you approve a process and disapprove of the result of the same process? From sound legal analysis, the former Senator's case would have been dismissed at this point. He had asked for the impossible, he is attempting by his claims, to forge a solemnisation of oil and water, immixible. The rules of the Tribunal however bought him sometime; rulings on preliminary objections may be deferred to be taken as part of the final judgement.

June 10,2019, the trial started in ernest and Akpabio has so far filed about fourteen (14) witnesses. In trial, witnesses have testifed to results not in tandem with INEC's official results, witnesses have debated over issues of cancelled units cum wards. Akpabio's witnesses have consistently revealed that Senator Ekpenyong in truth has no case to answer; ward collation agents have said they do not know the number of units in their wards, they have admitted that they did not sign the results from their ward. Some others have confirmed that supporters of the APC in the affected Senatorial District voted without accreditation and one, either in arrogance or sheer ignorance even dared to say that the aggregate of votes cast (valid and invalid) does not need to agree with the number of accredited voters. The last in the series of infamous testimonies, one witness admitted that what he said in court is what the lawyer told him to say, that he only signed a prepared statement.

Although from the pre-trial report Akpabio may still have about 90 witnesses to call, the foregoing testimonies are from his acclaimed "star witnesses". Caveat: If these be from the best, what should we expect from the subsidiaries?

The matter was adjounred for continuation of the Petitioner's case after which the Respondents will have the opportunity to also open and state their own case.