Youth Group Raises Concern Over Judiciary’s Handling Of Kogi Gov’ship Election Case

The Kogi Youth Stakeholders Forum has urged the Supreme Court to safeguard democracy by rectifying alleged errors in the judgments of the Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal and the Appeal Court regarding the 2023 Kogi State governorship election case.

At a press conference held in Lokoja, the State capital, the Forum expressed concern over what it called the potential influence of external interference on judicial matters.

The spokesperson of the Forum, Comrade Michael Onimisi, on behalf of the group, said, “As concerned citizens, we are worried about the manner in which judicial matters are being handled in our courts today. Judgements are no longer guided by the position of the laws, but rather by judges’ thoughts using technicalities not supported by the constitution.”

Another speaker from Kogi West senatorial district of the state, Barrister Ademola Tosin, noted that the Supreme Court should protect itself from the embarrassment caused by some judicial officers, particularly in the Kogi governorship election case, where the judgement was said to have allegedly favoured the highest bidder.

Barrister Ademola emphasised the importance of ensuring that the judiciary remains independent and impartial in its decision-making process.

LEADERSHIP recalls that the Kogi State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal and the Court of Appeal dismissed the case filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and its candidate, Murtala Yakubu Ajaka, challenging the victory of Usman Ododo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) on the grounds that the petition lacked merit and failed to provide substantial evidence to support the allegations of electoral malpractices and non-compliance with the Electoral Act in the November 21, 2023 election.

According to the SDP, despite the presence of what it called compelling BVAS machines displayed openly in court, on order of the court, demonstrated by an INEC staff, which allegedly exposed a clear discrepancies between the number of accredited voters and the final results in all the polling units in contention, presentation of Certified True Copies of all documents, and forensic evidences, both courts ruled that, the petitioners were unable to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims of over-voting and rigging during the election.

As the case moves to the Supreme Court, the group said there was significant anticipation surrounding the potential outcome, hoping that the apex court will review the judgments of the lower courts and examine the evidence presented by both parties.