Home News Peter Obi: Supreme Court Ruling not about Buhari, Atiku

Peter Obi: Supreme Court Ruling not about Buhari, Atiku

by Armada News
157 views

By Baron Ike

 

Peter Obi, Vice Presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) during the 2019 elections has said the judgement of Nigeria’s apex court that voided the appeal of the PDP was not about the individuals that contested the election.

 

Rather, Obi said it is about the future of Nigeria and Nigerian children.

 

The Supreme Court Wednesday dismissed the appeal filed by PDP and its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, challenging the February 2019 election of President Muhammadu Buhari.

 

Justice Tanko Mohammed, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) led five other Justices of the Supreme Court to hear about six appeals in the case filed by the PDP and Atiku, challenging the victory of Buhari in the February 23 poll.

 

The other Justices are Bode Rhodes- Vivour, Olukayode Ariowola, Amiru Sanusi, Ejembi Eko and Uwani Aba-Aji.

 

The apex court, led by Chief Justice of Nigeria, Tanko Muhammad dismissed the PDP petition moments after it began hearing the appeal.

 

Commenting on the ruling, Obi told newsmen outside the court that the election was not about the two main contenders for the position – Buhari and Atiku – but about the future of the country.

 

He said: “Our reason for coming to court is because we believe that the election and the result was not result of lawful votes cast but the process has come to the end.

 

“This election and the judgement is not about President Buhari or His Excellency, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar. It is about the future of our country, what we are going to bequeath to our children.”

 

Obi, who was former governor of Anambra State for eight years also thanked Nigerians who voted during the election and also followed the proceedings in court.

 

The Presidential Election Tribunal last month dismissed Atiku and PDP’s petition, prompting them to appeal to the Supreme Court on 66 grounds.

 

They, among other things, alleged that the panel of the tribunal erred in law “when they relied on ‘overall interest of justice’ to hold that the 2nd Respondent’s Exhibits R1 to R26, P85, and P86 were properly admitted in evidence.

Leave a Comment