Tribunal begins hearing on pre-hearing issues to fix timetable for substantive matters
By Jeph Ajobaju, Chief Copy Editor
Oral arguments begin on Monday at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) sitting at the Appeal Court in Abuja to sack or retain Bola Tinubu as President-elect as declared on March 1 by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Tinubu is a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC), the party of the out-going administration of President Muhammadu Buhari.
The PEPT after receiving replies from the parties concerned, fixed May 8 to hear petitions from Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate Peter Obi, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar, and others.
APC National Legal Adviser Ahmad El-Marzuq confirmed the date to The PUNCH and said the APC legal team has been briefed and is ready to defend the party’s mandate.
“We have been briefed about the hearing coming up next week. But who told you the election petitions at the tribunal must necessarily be concluded before May 29?” he argued in response to a question on how long it would take for the case to be decided.
“Are you saying if they were not concluded before President Buhari leaves office, the government should be left in a vacuum and the President-elect should not be sworn in? It is not a must.”
An official of the tribunal confirmed on condition of anonymity that “the Presidential Election Tribunal has fixed Monday, May 8th for the hearing of the petitions challenging the victory of the President-elect, Bola Tinubu.’’
A member of Tinubu’s legal team, Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, said: “Yes, the hearing is on Monday, but it’s for a pre-hearing session. The hearing is to clarify if there are any applications before the main hearing will start.
“The timetable will be set for the hearing of the substantive matters.”
It was learnt the court stopped receiving replies from the petitioners on April 23.
INEC Chairman Mahmood Yakubu on March 1 declared Tinubu winner of the presidential election, saying he won 8.8 million votes, followed by Atiku (6.9 million), and Obi (6.1 million), and others.
Atiku and Obi filed separate petitions at the tribunal seeking orders to annul the election or to declare them the winner.
_________________________________________________________________
Related articles:
Obi remains upbeat on reclaiming his ‘stolen’ presidential mandate
PDP insists Atiku won presidential vote, in riposte to Lai
APC is sleepless cos it murdered sleep by rigging election, says LP
__________________________________________________________________
Atiku and PDP
Atiku anchored his seven prayers on five grounds and asked the tribunal to declare him President-elect, according to reporting by The PUNCH.
Alternatively, Atiku urged the court to cancel the election and order a rerun because alleged irregularities marred the vote on February 25 in thousands of polling units.
His team of lawyers, led by Joe-Kyari Gadzama, SAN, filed the petition in which he and the PDP insisted as of March 1 when Tinubu was declared the winner of the election, the entire results and accreditation data from polling units had not been transmitted and uploaded by the INEC to its IRev portal.
Obi and LP
Obi, among others, alleged in his petition
- The election was characterised by various irregularities, including the non-qualification of Tinubu and his running mate, Kashim Shettima, to contest.
- Tinubu failed to win the majority of the lawful votes cast.
- Tinubu failed to secure one-quarter of the lawful votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) as stated in the Constitution.
- The election was conducted in substantial non-compliance with the law.
Tinubu and APC
Tinubu while submitting his presidential nomination form to the INEC in June 2022, chose Ibrahim Masari as a “placeholder” for the substantive vice presidential candidate who would later be Shettima.
Tinubu’s action was described by analysts as a strategy to beat INEC’s deadline of 17 June 2022 for presidential candidates to submit names of their vice presidential picks.
The APC in its reply to the petitions asked the PEPT to dismiss the petitions filed by the opposition parties.
It described the petition filed by Atiku as “a gross abuse of court processes.”
Tinubu, in a preliminary objection filed by his team of lawyers led by Wole Olanipekun, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the entire petition, partly because Atiku is a perpetual presidential election loser, having lost five of such since 1993.
Tinubu added Obi lacked the locus to challenge his election victory.
He argued, among others, that
- Obi was not validly nominated to contest the presidential election in line with Sections 77(2) and (3) of the Electoral Act, 2022.
- Obi’s name was not found in the register of members of the LP, noting he defected to the party from the PDP less than 30 days before the LP primary election that produced him as its presidential candidate was conducted.
- Obi, having jumped from one political party to another, lacked the requisite structure to win the presidential contest.
Tinubu said it was his own consistency and track record of excellence in public service that endeared him to millions of voters across the federation.
Tribunal understands the need to follow the law, says Tanko
Obi-Datti Presidential Campaign Council spokesman Yunusa Tanko reiterated the tribunal understands the need to handle the petition in line with the Electoral Act.
“I think they should [be able to conclude it]. The Electoral Act is very clear in stating that all cases must have finished before the handing over of power. So let’s see what they are going to do,” he said.
“We are still optimistic, though. They know the danger of not concluding the issue on time based on the Electoral Act. So they have got to explain to us. The rule has been given already.”
Ozekhome exudes confidence
A member of the PDP legal team, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, expressed confidence in the ability of the panel to dispense justice without fear or favour.
He said justice is the singular most potent force that would determine the petition filed by Atiku because the Judges would be guided by a sense of responsibility to their fatherland and not the powers of the state.
“We are hopeful that justice shall be served without the tribunal listening to the blaring sirens of power, or being swayed by officialdom or government jack-bootism,” Ozekhome enthused.
He insisted the PDP has sufficient evidence to back up its claim that the declaration of Tinubu was flawed, and the evidence will guide Judges in their ruling.
APC Director of Publicity Bala Ibrahim also expressed optimism the hearing is a window of opportunity for the courts to affirm the victory of Tinubu.
His words: “I think I heard the CJN [Chief Justice of Nigeria] talking about the speedy dispensation of the issue. They are, of course, aware of all these things. It must be in their reckoning that time is of the essence.
“If it cannot be disposed of within the period, there is no need for it. I want to believe they are going to see to it. After all, justice delayed is justice denied. I am sure they will do the needful.”