Wole Olanipekun, counsel for Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima, urged the presidential election court to dismiss the petition for lacking in merit.
By Jeffrey Agbo
The Presidential Election Petition Court has reserved judgment in a petition filed by the Labour Party and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, challenging the victory of President Bola Tinubu.
The five-member panel presided over by Justice Haruna Tsammani reserved judgment on Tuesday to a date that will be communicated to all after the parties adopted their final written addresses.
Respondents are the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) president Bola Tinubu and Vice president Kashim Shettima and All Progressives Congress (APC).
Following the closing of the cases of the respondents on July 5, time was given to parties to file their written addresses.
Adopting their final written addresses filed on July 14 , Abubakar Mahmoud, the lead counsel for INEC urged the court to uphold their objections and take the petition as lacking in merit.
Mohamund said there were five issues listed but he would speak on two.
One of them, according to Mohamund, was the non compliance and the conduct of the election conducted by INEC.
According to him, all these revolves in the use of technology and the petitioners totally misunderstood what was used, that is the BVAs and IreV portal.
He argued that the evidence before the court showed clearly that the first respondent made sure technology was deployed for election.
The two points of disagreement he said were the contrivation in the minds of the petitioners that electronic collation of the results was carried out.
READ ALSO:
‘Shut up’, Obi-Datti Media calls EIU to order over ‘jaundiced’ prediction on 2023 elections
He added that the petitioners failed to present evidence to support their allegation on electronic collation of any of the election results.
Mahmoud argued further that the petitioners alleged that the glitches that occurred during the election was orchestrated to manipulate the result of the election.
Similarly, Wole Olanipekun , counsel for Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima urged the presidential election court to dismiss the petition for lacking in merit.
He argued that non compliance is one area, but that results have not been electronically uploaded to IreV is not part of collation system.
He added that all collation was done physically.
For the 25 per cent votes of the FCT, he argued that Tinubu secured two third votes, adding Obi does not have locus standi for rerun election because he was not the 1st runner-up.
He further said there is no connectivity between the the petitioners and the petition.
Counsel for APC, Lateef Fagbemi, aligned with the submissions of Mahmoud and Olanipekun.
He added that the petitioners did not dispute that voting took place and results announced.
He argued that to dispute the results, evidence must be given from every polling unit.
He argued further on FCT 25 per cent votes and qualification of candidates.
Responding, Livy Uzoukwu, counsel for the petitioners, argued that the respondents have laboured in vain to understand the importance of IreV.
He added that their witness told the court during his evidence how important the IreV is.
He said the election cannot be said to be credible if INEC cannot give certified true copies (CTC) of 8,123 blurred result sheets.
Uzoukwu, therefore, submitted told the presidential election court that the petitioners have proven their petition particularly in the allegations of non-compliance.
