The issue of the order given by the election petition tribunal sitting in Benin City, that all parties must be present during the inspection of ballot papers used for the September 28, 2016 governorship election in the state, dominated Wednesday’s proceedings as counsels for APC and PDP exchanged words.

Meanwhile, the tribunal led by Justice Ahmed Badamasi, has adjourned its sitting to 12th of December 2016 for pre-hearing and January 9th 2017, for the hearing of the main petition.

According to ceoafrica, the ruling of the tribunal on the adjournment of the pre-hearing to 12th December 2016 and the hearing proper of the petition to January 9, 2017 was sequel to an earlier meeting by the senior counsels to both sides who agreed that the avalanche of petitions before the tribunal should be taken during the final address by the parties so as to save time and lessen the tribunal’s work.

The legal fireworks in the tribunal heightened when the Counsel to the petitioners led by Kemi Pinheiro (SAN) drew the tribunal’s attention that its order on inspection of ballot papers was being frustrated by the Respondents.

He said the petitioners have intimated the respondents as to some of the challenges they face, adding however that “it does appear that there is a deliberate and connived attempt to frustrate our inspection of ballot papers”.

He went on to say that during the scanning process the Respondents has insisted that each of their ten representatives must inspect a ballot paper which according to him will take at least 30 minutes to inspect which he described as time wastage.

“Even when INEC gives a time of 9am for the inspection to start they will come late and always insist that the inspection start afresh. The party who is a beneficiary is taking step to frustrate the process and we urge the tribunal to ensure that its order was carried out”.

Pinheiro’s observation drew the ire of counsel to the Respondents (INEC, APC and Obaseki), who condemned his observation, asserting that they have been cooperating with the petitioners in the inspection of the ballot papers.

Wole Olanipekun (SAN) who led Mr Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) for APC and Oyinye  Anumonye for the INEC, said the issue of inspection of ballot papers was not for the tribunal to decide adding that “if they want a variation they should bring an application to that effect. I urge the Tribunal not to entertain this as they have no business to do so”.

While aligning himself with the submission of Mr Olanipekun (SAN), Counsel to Obaseki, Fagbemi (SAN) disclosed that “we have even challenged the competence of the tribunal on this issue but when we get there we will cross it. I am not abreast with the complaints of the petitioners that they have been frustrated and therefore urged the tribunal not to delve into this matter. The petitioners should be advised to do the needful”.

On his part, Mr Anumonye of INEC declared that INEC had never frustrated the inspection of ballot papers as alleged by PDP Counsel, stating that INEC doors are always open each time parties seek for their services.

In its ruling, the tribunal agreed with Counsel to both sides that the applications earlier scheduled for hearing yesterday should be taken as written address by Counsels at the final stage of hearing of the petition.

On the issue of inspection of ballot papers which resulted to the heated argument between the counsels to petitioners and respondents, the Tribunal ruled that its earlier order that all parties must be present during the inspection stands.

Justice Badamasi further ruled that any party that is not comfortable with the way and manner the inspection was being carried out should come up with an application to that effect.