Okon also joined the PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as defendants in the case.
In a joint statement of defence during the week, Eno and PDP, who are the defendants, have withdrawn the “Confirmation of Result” earlier tendered to the court in defence of the certificate forgery allegation.
It could be recalled that while responding to Okon’s earlier statement of claim to the Federal High Court, Eno had in his first statement of defence attached a copy of ‘Confirmation of Result’.
SaharaReporters had exclusively reported how WAEC confirmed that the governorship candidate’s certificate does not exist in its records.
In a letter dated April 8, 2022, and signed by T. A. Ademola, WAEC Exams and Records, the examination body stated that it could not certify the certificate because it did not issue it.
“This is to notify you that certificate No. PO 275878 A for candidate No. 15725119 of December 1983 submitted for certification by you does not exist in our records hence we cannot certify what we did not issue,” the letter had read.
However, in the joint statement of defence, Eno has withdrawn the said ‘Confirmation of Result’ and replaced it with a ‘Leaving Certificate and Testimonial’.
But a thorough examination of the school testimonial reveals more discrepancies.
The testimonial, which was issued by Victory High School II, Ikeja, does not carry Eno’s name.
In an affidavit attached to his statement of defence, the PDP guber candidate declared that his name is “Umo Bassey Eno” which is the same name on his birth certificate and his 1983 WAEC result.
However, the testimonial recently tendered as a replacement for the ‘Confirmation of Result’ bears “Bassey Umo Eno”.
“This latest revelation has further incriminated Eno in the forgery allegation,” a lawyer involved in the case told SaharaReporters.
Earlier, SaharaReporters reported that the testimonial, which is not in the list of documents submitted to INEC, was issued by Victory High School II, Ikeja, as against the ‘Confirmation of Result’ which carried Victory High School I, Ikeja, and WAEC results bearing Victory High School, Ikeja.
Also, in the testimonial dated 10th July 1981, Eno offered ‘Bible Knowledge’ as one of the subjects in the examination, but his WAEC result of June 1981 records ‘Religious Knowledge’ as one of the subjects.
Again, the testimonial indicates that the Akwa Ibom Governor’s stooge offered eight (8) subjects but his WAEC result records four (4) subjects while the withdrawn ‘Confirmation of Result’ recorded a total of six (6) subjects with four (4) passes and two (2) failures.
Fresh investigations revealed that the testimonials issued as at 1981 does not have space for “student’s signature” which is clearly different from what Eno tendered in court.
In his response to the PDP candidate’s statement of defence, Okon said WAEC failed to grant Eno’s request to validate his 1981 and 1983 certificates but rather the examination body only highlighted the discrepancies in the name.
“In their responses both dated 27th June, 2022, the West African Examination Council failed to validate the 2nd Defendant’s claims to possessing the claimed school certificate status, but rather disclosed that the results belonged to one BASSEY UMO ENO (as regards the 1981 WAEC result) and one ENO UMO BASSEY (regarding the 1983 WAEC result) respectively,” Okon told the court through his legal team.
“The examination body also inserted a caveat in these letters, stating unequivocally that the Honourable Attorney General would need to satisfy himself that the 2nd Defendant and the said Bassey Umo Eno and ENO UMO BASSEY referred to one and the same person.”
Okon also alleged that in an attempt to “fraudulently validate his school certificate status”, Eno superimposed his current passport picture on the said letter from WAEC, insisting that as at 1981 and 1983, WAEC did not attach pictures of candidates to their certificate and results.
He further revealed that forensic evidence has confirmed that the Akwa Ibom governor’s stooge altered the confirmation of result issued by WAEC.
“The Plaintiff shall call and rely on the relevant expert evidence to prove the above, and to also show that the picture of the 2nd defendant was superimposed on the said letter and to also show the age of the person (the 2nd defendant) on the picture/passport photograph.
“The said forensic expert report/evidence is hereby pleaded and may be founded upon at the trial.
“The Plaintiff shall tender and rely on forensic expert report/evidence to show that the 2nd defendant is not the bonafide owner of the 1981 and 1983 school certificate results; the very basis of his nomination/sponsorship by the 1st Defendant,” he added.
Meanwhile, the case, which came up again on Thursday before Justice Agatha A. Okeke, witnessed a new twist as both parties opposed an application by a certain Etim Akan to be joined in the suit.
When the suit FHC/UY/CS/110/2022 came up for hearing, Akan, one of the defeated aspirants in the PDP governorship primaries, sought the court’s leave to be joined as a party in the suit.
However, counsel to the plaintiff, Uche Awa (SAN) opposed to the application by Akan, describing it as abuse of court process.
Speaking for the 1st and 2nd Defendants, Paul Usoro (SAN) citing relevant judicial authority said the only grounds on which a party can be joined in a suit is where their participation will aid the administration of justice, and where such party’s interests are tied to the interests of the defendants.
Akan had pleaded that having bought the forms from the 1st Defendant, and having participated and secured some votes at the primaries, he deserved to be a part of the case.
Tabi Towo who appeared for the aspirant, argued that neither the plaintiff, Akan Okon, nor the 2nd Defendant Pastor Umo Eno was qualified whereas his client was eminently qualified and asked among other things that the May 25, 2022 governorship primaries be nullified.
The said Akan had in a motion on notice, sought the order of the court to be joined as 4th defendant, and to be served with all the processes filed on the suit.
Accordingly, Justice Okeke adjourned proceedings to a later date to be communicated to the parties, for ruling on the application.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.