By Pascal Oparada (Social Media/Tech Reporter)
The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, has said that the TraderMoni initiative embarked upon by the federal government was a vote-buying scheme which lacks budgetary backing.
Atiku also described the scheme as corrupt extra-judicial spending which was not backed by law.
He said this in the petition he filed before the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal to challenge the result of the February presidential election.
“In spite of the fact that there was no budgetary provision for this scheme; and in spite of public outcry against it, the 2nd respondent (Buhari), through the Vice-President of Nigeria, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, SAN, went round all the states of Nigeria and the FCT, Abuja, and shared the said sum of N10,000 to traders, thus using state resources to buy votes,” he said in the petition.
In his reply filed through his lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), Buhari denied the petitioners’ claim, insisting that Trader Moni was never a vote-buying measure.
He said the policy was one of the many social intervention policies of the government provided for in the national budget to alleviate the suffering of the masses.
However, in their reply to Buhari’s response to the petition, Atiku and the PDP faulted the claim, contending that there was no such provision in the Appropriation Act permitting distribution of “scarce public funds” before and during the February 23 presidential election.
The petitioners, through their team of lawyers led by Dr. Livy Uzoukwu (SAN), noted that the National Assembly “vehemently protested” against the spending under the Trader Moni policy for not being appropriated for in the Appropriation Act.
They stated: “Contrary to paragraphs 331, 332, 333, 334, 335 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341 and 342 of the 2nd respondent’s (Buhari) reply, the petitioners denied that there was a budgetary provision in any Appropriation Act permitting the distribution of scarce public funds before and during the election of February 23, 2019, to so-called traders under the guise of Trader Moni.
“The petitioners further state that the National Assembly vehemently protested against the spending of un-appropriated funds.”
The petitioners had earlier responded to INEC and the APC which are the 1st and the 3rd respondents to the petition, respectively.
No date has been fixed by the tribunal for the commencement of the hearing of the petition.
