The Supreme Court on Friday, affirmed the re-election of Hope Uzodimma of Imo in the Nov. 11, 2023 governorship election.
A five-member panel of the apex court, in a lead judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Idris, dismissed the appeal filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate in Imo election, Samuel Anyanwu, for lacking in merit.
Justice Idris resolved all the issues raised for determination in the appeal against the appellants.
Justice Idris equally dismissed the appeal by the Labour Party (LP) and its candidate, Athan Achonu, for being unmeritorious.
The judge, who authored and read the lead judgment, resolved the three issues identified for determination against the appellants.
He found that the appellants as petitioners at the election tribunal, failed to prove their case as required.
He proceeded to affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which upheld the decision of the Imo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which dismissed the appellants’ petition.
BRANDPOWER reports that the Court of Appeal, Abuja had, on July 16, dismissed the appeal filed by the PDP and Anyanwu, challenging the decision of the Imo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which affirmed the election of Hope Uzodinma as the authentic governor of the state.
The three-member panel led by Justice Bitrus Sanga held that the appeal lacked merit having resolved all issues formulated against the appellants in the suit.
In the same vein, the appellate court also dismissed the appeal by the Labour Party and its candidate, Achonu Nneji, and that of the Allied Peoples Movement for also lacking in merit.
BRANDPOWER reports that the appellants, who were dissatisfied with the election tribunal judgment, had approached the Court of Appeal on grounds that the Nov. 11, 2023 election, was invalid because of non-compliance with the provision of the Electoral Act.
The appellants also challenged Uzodimma’s qualification with an allegation that his West African Examination Certificate (WAEC) result was forged.
While delivering that judgment, the court of appeal held that the appellants in their appeal, failed to prove the allegation of non-compliance as alleged.
The panel also held that the appellants failed to prove that the governor submitted a forged certificate.
