Daniel Akpan not a staff of UNIUYO – Gov Eno’s witness tells Tribunal

A Director of Human Resources at the University of Uyo (UNIUYO) in Akwa Ibom State, Mr. Linus Okoko, has provided testimony before the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal in Uyo, revealing that a witness called by Senator Bassey Akpan and the Young Progressives Party (YPP), Daniel Edet Akpan, is not an employee of the university.

According to Vanguard , Mr. Okoko, who was the first subpoenaed witness for the second Respondent, Governor Umo Eno, in the ongoing election case, made this disclosure on Monday night during his testimony before the Tribunal.

Senator Akpan, who was the YPP’s Governorship candidate in the March 18, 2023 election, and his party filed a joint petition with the Governorship Tribunal seeking the disqualification of Pastor Umo Eno as the duly elected governor of Akwa Ibom State.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Governor Umo Eno, and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) were joined as the First, Second, and Third Respondents, respectively, in the petition, and on Monday, they began presenting their defense against the allegations made by the petitioners.

During the proceedings, Linus Okoko informed the Tribunal that Daniel Akpan, who had claimed to be an Administrative Officer at UNIUYO while giving his testimony weeks ago, is an impostor, as the university does not have anyone by that name on its staff list.

The witness also testified that the University of Uyo does not have a Faculty of Environmental Sciences, as stated by Daniel Akpan, but rather a “Faculty of Environmental Studies.”

“I have conducted a thorough search of the university’s staff records. Your Honors, I have produced the staff records of the university as required by the court, and I discovered that his letter of appointment as a Clerical Officer is also forged,” Mr. Okoko testified.

“All the documents presented by Daniel Edet Akpan did not come from the University of Uyo. It is impossible not to know the head of the department you are working in. If you don’t know anyone else, you must know the name of your boss, under whom you are working,” he added.

When shown the promotion letter that Daniel Akpan had submitted as evidence during his testimony, Okoko stated, “The man (Daniel Edet Akpan) is a forger. The university doesn’t address letters to staff with their village addresses but rather their faculties and departments.”

Furthermore, he testified, “There is no way two people can have the same staff number. If I had seen the said Daniel Edet Akpan on the day he came here as a witness for the petitioner, I would have ensured he was arrested. He is an impostor.”

Tayo Oyetibo (SAN), the Counsel to the Third Respondent (PDP), called Engr. Uwem Okoko as the only witness earlier in the day.

During cross-examination, Engr. Okoko, who stated that he was the State Collation Agent for the Third Respondent (PDP) in the Gubernatorial election, explained his responsibilities, which included ensuring that the results were accurately recorded on the forms.

He also informed the Tribunal that after voting in his own polling unit in Ikot Essien Village, Ikot Abasi LGA, on the day of the election, he monitored the conduct of the exercise in other locations as well.

“After I finished voting in my unit at around 11 a.m., I proceeded to Uyo. That journey took me through Mkpat Enin, Onna, Eket, Nsit Ubium, Nsit Ibom, Nsit Ibom, Ibesikpo-Asutan LGAs, and finally to Uyo,” he explained.

“During my journey, I slowed down at most of the polling units along the road and continued until I reached Uyo. In all the units I monitored on my way to Uyo, the process was orderly and peaceful,” Engr. Okoko added.

In response to a question about whether the statistician subpoenaed by the Petitioners contacted him for the purpose of analysis, Engr. Okoko stated, “No, Your Honors, I didn’t see him at the State collation center, which is at the INEC media center in Uyo. He also never contacted me for the purpose of his analysis.”

Okoko confirmed and presented the result sheets of the 31 local government areas of the state, which were received by the party agents, as mentioned in his sworn witness statement, as evidence before the Tribunal.

The Counsel to the Petitioners, Tunde Falola, objected to the admissibility of the documents, arguing that the witness did not mention Form EC8a in his written statement.

However, Tayo Oyetibo (SAN), the PDP Counsel, drew Falola’s attention to the section in the witness’s written statement where Form EC8A and other forms received from his party agents were mentioned.

The three-member panel, led by Justice Adekunle Adeleye, overruled the objection raised by the petitioners and admitted all 31 documents as evidence.

The second Respondent is expected to conclude his evidence on Tuesday after calling three more witnesses. Meanwhile, INEC did not present any witnesses regarding the election matter.

FutureBest (
)