Ahead of the Supreme Court judgment of the appeal filed by the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, candidate, Asue Ighodalo of the September 21, 2024 governorship election in Edo State slated for Thursday, July 10, 2025, a political analyst, Mr Denis Aiyevbekpen has asked the apex court judges to review the judgement of the lower courts.
DAILY POST reports that in a statement made available to newsmen in Benin City on Wednesday, Denis Aiyevbekpen opined that election petitions carry the weight of more than just law.
Aiyevbekpen said the petition also carried the burden of history, legitimacy, and public confidence in Nigeria’s democracy.
The political analyst in the statement, “Edo 2024 Election Judgment: Why Supreme Court Should Review, Pass Objective Judgment”, urged the court to go beyond procedural convenience.
According to him, the court must courageously confront the integrity of the election’s outcome, especially in light of substantial allegations of irregularities in over 765 polling units.
“This is no ordinary petition but a litmus test for judicial independence in politically sensitive cases.
“Lower courts have already dismissed the petition on technical grounds, citing “failure to call polling agents”, despite alleged glaring discrepancies between
Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, BVAS, records and announced results”, he said.
He averred that if justice is to be restored, the Supreme Court must review the lower courts’ judgment not just by the letter of the law, but by its spirit.
He noted that it is a fundamental principle that substances should outweigh form, especially in matters that affect the sovereign will of voters.
“BVAS machines, 154 of them were tendered by the PDP, highlighting gross mis-collation in 765 units. Yet these materials were dismissed as “dumped documents” simply because no witness demonstrated each entry.
“This rigid interpretation of evidence law by the lower courts, Tribunal, and Court of Appeal seems to disrespect the verifiability that BVAS was designed to provide. Let ballot proof override procedural proof.
“When tribunal rulings favour procedural technicalities like absence of polling unit agents, over the forensic clarity of digital and certified INEC records, justice suffers.
“The documented over-voting in 765 polling units cannot be brushed aside. Voters’ marks must matter more than technical marks in legal filings. A failure to recognize this fuels public skepticism and discredits electoral reform.Judicial courage, greater than Judicial convenience
“The Supreme Court must resist the lure of the convenience of hiding behind the ‘burden of proof’ language to avoid confronting INEC’s failures.
“Among the most alarming findings is the lack of serialized ballot papers, a direct violation of Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act.
“This opens doors to multiple voting and ballot stuffing. If the judiciary fails to challenge these structural breaches, who will? Judicial courage must triumph over judicial convenience”, he stated.
Aiyevbekpen, who urged the apex court to respect Edo’s ballots and not technicalities, argued that the election petition appeal is not about merely satisfying legal formalities but about ensuring that the votes cast by Edo people are respected.
He also urged the Supreme Court judges to respect Edo’s ballots and not technicalities, the law’s Spirit and not just the letter, but “the Electoral Act 2022 to ensure credible elections.
“Courts must interpret the law in a way that reflects its intent, credible, free, and fair outcomes.
“Law’s spirit, not just its letter, must guide the Court’s decision for Edo. The integrity of Edo’s 2024 governorship election is in question.
“The tribunal and appellate courts’ passive acceptance of INEC’s silence, coupled with a disregard for BVAS inconsistencies, leaves a wound in public trust.
“The Supreme Court must step in to heal democracy, verify votes now.
Election petitions have a disturbing 88.9% failure rate in Nigeria.
“This fuels ‘electoral impunity, a belief that elections can be manipulated without consequence.
“The Supreme Court must break this cycle. There can be no democracy without vote accountability.
“Let justice be done even if it shakes the status quo. This moment calls for bold judicial statesmanship, not the comfort of precedent.
“It calls for a verdict that restores confidence, not erodes it further. Justice must speak louder than technicalities”, he added.
