The Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal is set to affirm President Bola Tinubu’s February election victory as the court, currently sitting in Abuja, has resolved most of the contending issues in his favour.
Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) are challenging Tinubu’s declaration as the winner of the 2023 presidential election.
Although the final verdict is being awaited today, as the panel of justices are currently reading the judgement as of the time of filing this report, the five-man panel of judges, has rejected the testimonies and exhibits tendered by 10 out of the 13 witnesses presented by Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP).
Peter Obi’s Witnesses Rejected
Justice Haruna Tsammani, reading the judgement in the petition filed by LP’s Peter Obi, held that the witness statements on oath of the 10 witnesses, who were subpoenaed to testify in the case, were incompetent, given that they were not filed along with the petition as of the close of the 21 days within which the petitioners must file their case as provided by the law.
Justice Tsammani noted that the petitioners were aware of the legal provision pertaining to the filing of witness statements on oath but went ahead to present 10 witnesses without their witness statements on oath earlier filed with the petition.
The judge reasoned that the witness statements on oath, having been declared incompetent, the 10 witnesses were also not competent to testify in the case.
The court also rejected the reports of forensic analyses tendered by LP’s three witnesses insisting they were either made during the pendency of the case or by an interested party.
Similarly, the court rejected the European Union report on the polls, arguing that it was not tendered by an EU official.
Alleged Criminal Record against Tinubu
The court ruled that no record of criminal arrest, arraignment or conviction was established against Tinubu as claimed by Peter Obi and LP.
Also, the court rejected Obi and LP’s position on the alleged forfeiture of $460000 by President Tinubu.
The court also ruled that the LP and its presidential candidate, Obi, failed to prove that President Tinubu of the APC was convicted for money laundering in the United States of America.
Electronic Transmission of Results
On the electronic transmission of results, the tribunal declared that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was at liberty to decide the mode of transmission of election results during the presidential election on February 25, 2023.
Citing Sections 52 and 65 of the Electoral Act 2022, the five-man panel held that the electoral umpire (INEC) was at liberty to prescribe the manner in which election results were transmitted during the poll.
Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the petition of the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, which argued that the victory of President Tinubu be annulled on the basis of INEC’s Results Viewing Portal (IReV) to upload election results electronically in real time.
25% FCT Votes
On the petitioners’ declaration that no candidate in the February 25 presidential election in Nigeria may validly be declared elected President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria without that candidate obtaining at least 25% of the votes cast in the FCT, Abuja, the judges held that FCT residents have no special privileges as the petitioners claimed.
LP’s Widespread Irregularities Claim
On the allegations of widespread irregularities during the presidential election, the court held that Obi’s petition only alleged that there were widespread irregularities without giving the particulars and the polling units.
One of the judges, Justice Abba Mohammed noted that in a presidential election held in 176,866 polling units in 774 Local Government Areas, it would be improper not to specify where there were irregularities.
Also, the court noted that Peter Obi and LP did not prove the particular polling unit where the election did not take place nor did they specify particulars of polling units where there are alleged complainants of irregularities.
“It was only in one instance that figures were given of alleged suppressed votes and we all know that elections are about figures,” it said.
“LP alleged that INEC reduced their scores and added it to APC votes but failed to supply particulars of what they actually scored before the said reductions, neither did they supply the polling units where it happened.”
The judges declared that the petitioners only made generic allegations without any proof. “Pleading must set out material facts and particulars. In the instant petition, there was no effort to prove specific allegations, particulars of complaints,” the court ruled.
Furthermore, the court noted that the law is clear that where someone alleges irregularities in a particular polling unit, such person must prove the particular irregularities in that polling unit before that petition can succeed.
Meanwhile the five-man panel of justices are still reading the judgement in the petition filed by Atiku and Obi.
Details later…