img#wpstats{display:none}
The Appeal court has held that the lower tribunal judgment is valid Viz a Viz section 294 of the constitution. This means there was no error committed with the fact that the second judge in the Majority judgment did not read out her judgment separately.
Issue 2
Whether non-consideration of the preliminary objections filed by the Appellant separately by the Tribunal ..
Resolved that the preliminary objections were not properly considered, not a ruling on the merit..issue resolved in Appellant’s favour.
Issue 4: Propriety of the Tribunal rejecting the judgment of the Court of Appeal ….
Resolved that the Tribunal was not right to have rejected the judgment of the Court of Appeal that cleared Adeleke of forgery.
In short issue of forgery has been settled by the Court of Appeal. The Tribunal was wrong to have held forgery against Adeleke.
Issues 5 & 7: Preference of server report for BVAS machines and the report of inspection. Also the issue of transmission of results by way of manual collation.
Resolved that BVAS machine is the primary source Further resolving the issue of over-voting, the Tribunal only relied on the Table provided by Oyetola and APC to give judgment in their favour. The Tribunal was wrong because there was no evidence to support such claim of over-voting.
Server report is not the physical evidence of accreditation
Oyetola’s witness not an expert which he held himself out to be. PW 1 claimed to be an expert, he did not give evidence of his qualifications, he did not deny his membership of the APC.
His evidence was barren.Further resolving the issue of over-voting, the Tribunal only relied on the Table provided by Oyetola and APC to give judgment in their favour. The Tribunal was wrong because there was no evidence to support such claim of over-voting.