Idahosa Demands INEC Recognition as Edo APC Candidate Amidst Primary Election Controversy

The fallout from the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship primary election in Edo State continues, as aspirant Hon Dennis Idahosa has officially written to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mahmood Yakubu, asserting his claim as the rightful winner and demanding recognition.

The controversy began on February 17, when the initial primary election produced conflicting results, with three candidates declared as winners. The confusion deepened as the Electoral Committee Chairman, Governor Hope Uzodimma, announced Idahosa as the winner, while the returning officer, Stanley Ugboaja, declared Monday Okpebholo as the victor. Another declaration came from Ojo Babatunde, representing the returning officers, announcing Anamero Dekeri as the winner.

To resolve the impasse, a rerun was ordered by the National Working Committee on February 22, chaired by Governor Bassey Otu. In this second round, Okpebholo emerged as the declared winner with 12,433 votes, defeating Idahosa, who garnered 6,541 votes.

In response, Idahosa, through a letter dated March 4, 2024, addressed to INEC Chairman Mahmood Yakubu, and drafted by Wole Olanipekun (SAN), has initiated legal action (Suit No.FHC/ABJ/CS/274/2024). Idahosa claims he won the initial February 17 exercise, arguing that there was no valid reason for the supplementary election ordered by the party leadership.

The letter contends that February 22 was not an independent election but a continuation of the February 17 exercise, making the results of the latter indispensable. Idahosa urged INEC to acknowledge the ongoing legal challenge and consider the results from the initial exercise.

As it stands, INEC possesses two sets of results for the APC primary election in Edo State dated February 17 and February 23, 2024. Idahosa asserts that even if only the votes from the February 17 results are considered, he remains the rightful winner. The letter emphasizes that the February 22 election was, at best, a supplementary one, drawing parallels with previous INEC decisions on supplementary elections.