A five-man panel of the Supreme Court yesterday (Friday) upheld the re-election of the governor of Imo State, Mr Hope Uzodimma in the off-cycle governorship election held on November 11, 2023.
In the lead judgement read Justice Mohammed Idris, the court threw out the appeal filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its governorship candidate in the election, Mr Samuel Anyanwu, for lacking in merit.
The judge resolved all the issues raised for determination in the appeal against the appellants.
He also dismissed the appeal by the Labour Party (LP) and its candidate, Mr Athan Achonu, for being unmeritorious.
He resolved the three issues identified for determination against the appellants.
Idris ruled 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.
It would be recalled that a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, led by Justice Bitrus Sanga, had, on 16 July, 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 Uzodinma.
The jurists held that the appeal lacked merit, having resolved all issues formulated against the appellants in the suit.
The court also dismissed the appeal by the LP and its candidate, Achonu as well as that of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) for also lacking in merit.
The appellants, who were dissatisfied with the election tribunal judgment, had approached the Court of Appeal on the grounds that the election was invalid because of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act.
The appellants also challenged Uzodimma’s qualification with the allegation that he forged his West African School Certificate Examination Certificate (WASCE) result
While delivering that judgment, the Court of Appeal held that the appellants 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.
