…As Ighodalo challenges Okpebholo’s victory in final appeal
The Supreme Court is set to hear the appeal in the contentious Edo State governorship election dispute today, Wednesday, 2 July 2025. The case pits the incumbent Governor Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) against his main challenger, Asue Ighodalo of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had declared Senator Okpebholo winner of the 21 September 2024 election, having polled 291,667 votes against Ighodalo’s 247,274.
Dissatisfied with the result, Ighodalo filed a petition at the Edo State Election Petition Tribunal, alleging widespread electoral malpractices, including overvoting, unlawful collation of results, tampering with election materials, and missing serial numbers on Form EC25B.
However, in January 2025, the tribunal dismissed the petition, citing lack of credible evidence and failure to tie allegations to specific polling units.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja upheld the tribunal’s ruling on 29 May 2025, criticising the PDP’s legal team for relying on improperly tendered documents and failing to call necessary witnesses. The appellate court also ordered the removal of unauthorised BVAS records from the court file.
Unconvinced by the decisions of the lower courts, Ighodalo escalated the matter to the Supreme Court. A seven-member panel of justices will today determine whether the appeals hold merit.
During the earlier hearing at the Court of Appeal, Ighodalo’s lead counsel, Robert Emukpoeruo (SAN), argued that the tribunal erred in evaluating the evidence. He maintained that the legal team had properly linked the documents to their claims, particularly regarding the flawed collation process at the ward level and the absence of required serial numbers on Forms EC25B.
Emukpoeruo contended that this absence violated Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022, which requires that electoral materials be properly accounted for. He argued that contrary to the tribunal’s view, polling agents were not needed to prove this particular claim.
In defence, Governor Okpebholo’s counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), argued that Forms EC25B do not contain provisions for serial numbers, as they are intended to record quantities of materials received and returned. He noted that serial numbers were instead recorded on Form EC40A, which had already been presented at the tribunal.
Ikpeazu also noted that although the petition referenced Form EC25D, which tracks the distribution of sensitive electoral materials at the local government level, it was never tendered during the tribunal proceedings.
Supporting these positions, APC’s counsel, Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), and INEC’s counsel, Kanu Agabi (SAN), maintained that under the Electoral Act, claims of non-compliance must be backed by witness testimonies from each disputed polling unit. Ukala said the petitioners failed to meet this requirement, calling only 19 witnesses for over 765 polling units cited in the petition, with just five being polling unit agents.
He further argued that the petitioners’ inability to present Forms EC25D undermined their allegations regarding serial number discrepancies.
A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, led by Justice M. A. Danjuma, had reserved judgment after hearing the submissions.
The Supreme Court is also expected to rule on other appeals challenging Governor Okpebholo’s election today.