Tinubu’s fate hangs in the balance as PEPC decides survival of Nigeria’s democracy
By Jeph Ajobaju, Chief Copy Editor
Atiku Abubakar’s lawyers have presented his final written address at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), honing their argument that Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) should be sacked from Aso Rock because he was not qualified for, and did not win, the presidential election on February 25.
The PEPC, headed by Justice Haruna Tsammani, has reserved judgment in the petition of the presidential candidate of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as well as in that of Peter Obi of the Labour Congress (LP).
Obi has also adopted and argued before the court his final address, presented through his lawyers. The court said the day of judgment will be communicated later to all the parties.
Atiku and PDP
Atiku and the PDP in their final address – through their lead counsel Chris Uche, SAN – urged the court to declare that Tinubu was not qualified ab initio to run for President, and asked the court to nullify the result of the election and order a re-run.
The petitioners alleged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), despite receiving more than N355 billion to conduct the ballot, deliberately bypassed all technological innovations it introduced to ensure a free and fair contest.
They argued the INEC breached the Electoral Act by failing to electronically transmit the results of the presidential election from polling units to its portal, the IReV.
“On the issue of transmission of election results based on new provisions in the Electoral Act, we are all in agreement, including the INEC, that there is a new regime in election management,” Uche said.
“The essence of the innovation was to enhance transparency in the collation of results, which was an area that we usually had problems and not the actual election, and secondly, to enhance the integrity of result declared.
“We agree that INEC had an option and we brought a video evidence by INEC Chairman showing that the electoral body indeed chose an option.
“It is our contention and it is here in evidence that witnesses admitted that results from the National Assembly election were transmitted but that of the presidential election was not.
“A whopping N355 billion was deployed for the election, therefore, INEC owe this court and the nation an explanation.”
________________________________________________________________________
Related articles:
Atiku criticises Economist Intelligence Unit for predicting PEPC won’t sack Tinubu
Obi decries EIU’s ‘paid-for-advert’ predicting Tinubu won’t be removed by PEPC
Ariwoola tells Judges to deliver justice, restore confidence in judiciary amid election petitions
________________________________________________________________
‘No technical glitch on Election Day’
“It is our submission that there was no technical glitch on the election day, rather, there was a deliberate bypass of the technology in order to create room for the manipulation that eventually took place,” Uche added, per Vanguard.
“Until the court makes a judicial pronouncement, there may not be compliance to express provisions of the new regime of the Electoral Act.
“My lords, in a situation like this, the burden shifts on INEC to explain. It is not on the petitioner to explain why there was such technical glitch.
“We urge this court to hold that there was a deliberate non-compliance. The substantiality of the non-compliance lies on the national spread of the non-transmission of results. It was national and not limited to certain polling units.”
Obi and LP
Vanguard also reports that in their final address, Obi and the LP – through their lead counsel Livy Uzoukwu, SAN – insisted there was no technical glitch during the election but an intentional act to sabotage it.
They sought the sack of Tinubu, insisting “an election where over 18,088 blurred results were uploaded to INEC’s IReV portal is certainly a flawed election.”
Respondents urge court to dismiss petitions
All the respondents – INEC, Tinubu and the APC – through their lawyers, implored the court to dismiss the petitions as grossly lacking in merit.
INEC’s lead counsel Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN said the presidential election was validly conducted and in substantial compliance with all relevant laws.
On Tinubu’s alleged failure to secure 25 per cent votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), he accused the petitioners of inviting the court to “adopt an interpretation that will result in absurdity.”
Mahmoud argued it is illogical for the petitioners to claim that a candidate must secure 25 per cent votes in the FCT to be declared winner of a presidential election.
He insisted the argument is against the spirit and intendment of the drafters of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, saying the FCT ought to be regarded as the 37th state of the federation that is without a special status during election.
Tinubu’s lead counsel Wole Olanipekun, SAN argued the petitioners failed to establish why the presidential election should be nullified.
He insisted Tinubu was duly elected with the majority of valid votes cast and urged the court to dismiss the petitions.
APC’s counsel Lateef Fagbemi, SAN equally asked the court to dismiss the petitions for want of merit.
