The relocation of the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal from Benin City to Abuja has raised significant concerns and discussions. The decision was made in response to security challenges and growing fears of possible disruptions to the tribunal’s activities. The tribunal, which was initially sitting in Benin City, will now continue its proceedings in Abuja starting from Monday, January 27, 2025.
The Secretary of the Tribunal, Mu’azu Bagudu Esq., made the announcement in a brief notice, stating that the tribunal would be sitting at the National Judicial Institute (NJI) in Abuja. However, the specific reasons for this shift were not immediately clear in his statement.
According to a member of the tribunal who spoke with Vanguard, the primary factor behind the move was the rising insecurity in Benin City, particularly around the tribunal’s venue. The member revealed that there had been clashes and violent incidents in the area, with concerns that the tribunal’s building could be targeted and set on fire. These safety concerns were deemed serious enough to warrant the relocation of the tribunal for the protection of everyone involved.
Though the official statement did not delve into the details, the security issues have been widely discussed. One source close to the tribunal explained that tensions had escalated in Benin City, with fears that political factions might resort to violence to disrupt the proceedings. The tribunal’s safety, and the safety of its participants, was therefore a key consideration in the decision to move the court sessions to Abuja.
This move has sparked reactions from different political camps in Edo State. The Edo State Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Peter Uwadiae-Igbinigie, was quick to accuse the opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), of pressuring for the tribunal’s relocation. According to Uwadiae-Igbinigie, the PDP had claimed that their witnesses did not feel safe to testify in Benin City, which he argued was not a valid reason. He stated that the APC’s legal team was prepared to challenge the PDP’s case, regardless of the location of the tribunal.
He also suggested that the PDP had lost confidence in its witnesses, noting that their testimonies had not added substantial value to the case. This, he claimed, was the real reason behind the PDP’s desire to move the tribunal to a less-publicized environment in Abuja. Uwadiae-Igbinigie implied that the PDP wanted to reduce media attention on the case, which he believed had not been favorable for them.
In response, the PDP’s Publicity Secretary, Chris Nehikhare, offered a different explanation. He stated that the PDP’s legal team had presented strong evidence in the case, which led to significant pressure from APC leaders in Edo State. According to Nehikhare, the PDP had been facing numerous threats, including attempts by APC chieftains to disrupt the tribunal’s proceedings. The PDP, he argued, felt that it would be unsafe to continue the hearings in Benin City given the mounting threats.
Nehikhare also suggested that the tribunal’s decision to move to Abuja was a necessary step to ensure a neutral and secure environment for the case. He emphasized that the new location was outside the control of both state and non-state actors, ensuring that justice could proceed without external interference or intimidation.
The decision to relocate the tribunal is not the first incident of tension surrounding the proceedings. During the pre-hearing session, the PDP had advised its supporters to avoid the tribunal to prevent any escalation of tensions. Despite this, several individuals, suspected to be PDP supporters, showed up at the court premises, wearing white face caps and T-shirts. Their presence led to clashes, and gunshots were fired in the area, further escalating fears about the safety of the tribunal.
There were also reports of an altercation involving supporters of the APC and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), who was representing the PDP. APC loyalists allegedly tried to prevent the SAN from leaving the tribunal’s premises, accusing him of using a government vehicle without proper authorization. This incident was part of a series of confrontations that made the tribunal’s location in Benin City increasingly untenable.
In another unsettling event, a private bodyguard, who was reportedly hired to protect the tribunal, was physically assaulted by suspected thugs. The bodyguard was accused of being an outsider with no business being involved in the court’s security arrangements. Tensions around the tribunal’s safety were only heightened by these incidents, leading to the decision to move the tribunal to Abuja.
Gunshots were also reported in Ezoti Street, which is near the tribunal’s previous location, just days before the relocation. This event, coupled with an incident involving a hooded official of the Department of State Services (DSS) who pointed his gun at journalists, further contributed to the growing insecurity in Benin City.
The move to Abuja comes amid ongoing political disputes and legal challenges following the Edo State governorship election. The PDP had filed a petition, alleging electoral fraud and irregularities in the conduct of the election, which saw the APC candidate, Asue Ighodalo, declared the winner. The PDP claims that the election was rigged in favor of Ighodalo and is seeking a reversal of the results.
While the relocation of the tribunal has sparked political debates and accusations, the safety of the tribunal and its participants remains the primary concern. The Nigerian judiciary has a responsibility to ensure that its courts operate in a secure and unbiased environment, free from external pressures. The move to Abuja is seen by many as a necessary step to safeguard the integrity of the judicial process.
The relocation also highlights the growing challenges faced by Nigeria’s legal system, particularly in politically sensitive cases. The increasing prevalence of political violence and intimidation in certain regions of the country raises questions about the ability of the judiciary to function freely and fairly. In this case, the decision to move the tribunal to Abuja is seen as an attempt to ensure that the case can proceed without interference.
