The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal has reserved judgment in the suit filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate, Asue Ighodalo, challenging the declaration of Governor Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the September 21, 2024, Edo State governorship election.
The three-man panel of the appellate court, presided over by Justice M.A. Danjuma, made the decision on Thursday, May 15, after hearing final arguments in three appeals filed by the PDP and Ighodalo, as well as a cross-appeal by the APC and Okpebholo against aspects of the earlier ruling by the Edo State Election Petitions Tribunal.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had declared Okpebholo the winner of the keenly contested election, having polled 291,667 votes, while Ighodalo of the PDP garnered 247,655 votes. Dissatisfied with the result, the PDP and its candidate filed a petition at the tribunal, alleging widespread irregularities, over-voting, and non-compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.
In its April 2, 2025 judgment, the Election Petitions Tribunal upheld INEC’s declaration and dismissed the petition for lack of merit, stating that the petitioners failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims. This prompted the PDP and Ighodalo to seek redress at the appellate court.
During Thursday’s proceedings, Ighodalo’s lead counsel, Robert Emukpoeruo (SAN), contended that the tribunal erred in law when it disregarded the petitioners’ arguments on non-compliance, particularly the failure of INEC to serialise sensitive election materials as mandated by law.
He specifically cited Form EC25B, arguing that it lacked the required serial numbers as stipulated in Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, thereby casting doubt on the integrity of the electoral process. Emukpoeruo maintained that the petitioners had sufficiently demonstrated discrepancies in the collation of results from polling units to ward levels.
The senior advocate further challenged the tribunal’s stance that the documents submitted by the petitioners were “dumped” on the court, asserting that the documents were properly identified and relevant to the alleged irregularities in 765 polling units across the state.
On the other hand, Okpebholo’s counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), countered the appeal by defending the tribunal’s ruling. He argued that the PDP’s evidence was weak and inconsistent, particularly noting that the required serial numbers appeared on Form EC40A—not EC25B as claimed—and that the PDP failed to tender Form EC25D, which was necessary to back their allegations.
Similarly, APC counsel, Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), called for the dismissal of the appeal, emphasizing that the PDP had called only 19 witnesses, with merely five being polling unit agents. Ukala stressed that under the Electoral Act, petitioners must present witnesses for each of the polling units they challenge, which the PDP did not do.
He described the PDP’s claims as “vague and unsupported,” noting that allegations involving over 700 polling units could not stand without specific and credible testimonies from those polling stations.
INEC, represented by legal luminary Kanu Agabi (SAN), aligned with the APC’s position and argued that the petitioners’ claims were speculative and failed to demonstrate substantial non-compliance to warrant the nullification of the election.
The legal tussle between Ighodalo and Okpebholo is one of the most closely watched post-election disputes in the country, with political implications for both the PDP and APC ahead of the 2027 general elections. The outcome could redefine party dynamics in Edo State and influence national party strategy.
Political observers have noted that while the PDP’s legal strategy hinges on alleged technical breaches and irregularities, the APC’s defence has largely relied on procedural consistency and electoral law compliance.
The reserved judgment now shifts the spotlight to the appellate court, whose ruling—when delivered—will determine whether the APC’s victory stands or if the PDP earns another shot at electoral redemption through a rerun.
Justice Danjuma, after listening to all submissions, announced that the court would communicate the judgment date to all parties. As it stands, the fate of Edo State’s governorship remains in judicial suspense.
While both parties await the outcome, legal analysts caution that the appellate court’s decision may not end the matter, as it could proceed to the Supreme Court depending on the outcome—potentially extending the legal battle until mid-2026.
For now, the people of Edo and political stakeholders across Nigeria watch with bated breath as the judiciary prepares to deliver a crucial verdict that could reshape the state’s political landscape.