The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on Thursday upheld the election of Governor Monday Okpebholo of Edo State. A three-member panel of justices, led by Justice M. A. Danjuma, dismissed the appeal filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Asuerinme Ighodalo, which challenged the outcome of the September 21, 2024 governorship election. In its ruling, the appellate court found no reason to overturn the May 15 judgment of the Edo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which had earlier validated Governor Okpebholo’s election under the All Progressives Congress (APC). It will be recalled that the tribunal, headed by Justice Wilfred Kpochi, dismissed petitions filed by the PDP and its candidate, the Action Alliance (AA) and its National Chairman Adekunle Rufai Omoaje, as well as the Accord Party (AP) and its candidate, Dr. Bright Enabulele. The tribunal concluded that there was no basis to nullify the APC’s victory. According to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Okpebholo of the APC polled 291,667 votes, defeating his closest rival, Ighodalo of the PDP, who garnered 247,655 votes. Dissatisfied, the PDP and Ighodalo approached the tribunal, alleging that the election violated key provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022. In their petition (EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024), they contended that Okpebholo did not secure the majority of lawful votes and that INEC failed to serialize and pre-record sensitive election materials, allegedly enabling rigging in favor of the APC. The PDP also alleged improper result computation in 765 polling units and called 19 witnesses, submitting exhibits including 153 Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines used in 133 polling units. They claimed the results were manipulated at collation centers, resulting in over-voting in favor of the APC candidate. However, the tribunal ruled that the petitioners failed to present credible evidence warranting the annulment of the election. It emphasized that the burden of proof lay with the petitioners, a burden they failed to discharge. The tribunal noted that the PDP merely submitted exhibits without effectively demonstrating them through competent witnesses. Many of the testimonies were deemed hearsay, as key witnesses such as polling unit agents, presiding officers, or actual voters were not presented. Citing Section 137 of the Electoral Act, the tribunal maintained that the petitioners were not barred from presenting such witnesses. It also rejected their claims regarding INEC’s handling of election materials under Section 73(2), ruling that no BVAS device was demonstrated to show that votes in disputed units exceeded accredited voters. Ultimately, the Court of Appeal upheld the tribunal's decision. Meanwhile, PDP candidate Asuerinme Ighodalo has vowed to challenge the ruling at the Supreme Court.