Presidential Election Petition Court Upholds Tinubu’s Victory!

The Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, sitting in Abuja yesterday dismissed the allegation by the Labour Party (LP) and its candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, that the 2023 presidential election was rigged in favour of Bola Tinubu to become President of Nigeria.

The court in its preliminary ruling that was delivered by Justice Abba Mohammed held that Obi and the LP did not by way of credible evidence establish their allegation that the election that held on February 25 was characterised by manifest corrupt practices.

It held that though the petitioners alleged that the election was marred by irregularities, they, however, failed to give specific details of where the alleged infractions took place.

The court noted that whereas Obi and the LP insisted that the election was rigged in 18,088 polling units across the federation, they were unable to state the locations of the said polling units.

It further held that Obi’s allegation that fictitious results were recorded to Bola Tinubu and the APC by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, was not proved.

Also, it held that the petitioners were unable to state the figures they claimed were reduced from election results they garnered in different states of the federation, especially in Ondo, Oyo, Rivers, Yobe, Borno, Tabara, Osun and Lagos States.

It held that the petitioners equally failed to state the polling units where over-voting occurred or the exact figures of unlawful votes that were credited to Tinubu by the INEC.

It stressed that though Obi and LP said they would rely on spreadsheets as well as forensic reports and expert analyses of their expert witnesses, they failed to attach the documents to the petition or serve same on the respondents as required by the law.

The court held that though the petition contained serious allegations that bordered on violence, non-voting, suppression of votes, fictitious entry of election results and corrupt practices, the petitioners, however, failed to give particulars of specific polling units where the incidents took place.

The court noted that whereas Obi and the LP insisted that the election was rigged in 18,088 polling units across the federation, they were unable to state the locations of the said polling units.

It further held that Obi’s allegation that fictitious results were recorded to Bola Tinubu and the APC by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, was not proved.

Also, it held that the petitioners were unable to state the figures they claimed were reduced from election results they garnered in different states of the federation, especially in Ondo, Oyo, Rivers, Yobe, Borno, Tabara, Osun and Lagos States.

It held that the petitioners equally failed to state the polling units where over-voting occurred or the exact figures of unlawful votes that were credited to Tinubu by the INEC.

It stressed that though Obi and LP said they would rely on spreadsheets as well as forensic reports and expert analyses of their expert witnesses, they failed to attach the documents to the petition or serve same on the respondents as required by the law.

The court held that though the petition contained serious allegations that bordered on violence, non-voting, suppression of votes, fictitious entry of election results and corrupt practices, the petitioners, however, failed to give particulars of specific polling units where the incidents took place.

It held that several portions of the petition that contained the allegations were “vague, imprecise, nebulous and bereft of particular materials.”

The Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP,) Abubakar Atiku also on the same day suffered a major setback in his legal battle to unseat Bola Ahmed Tinubu as Nigeria’s President as PEPC struck out several paragraphs of his petition relied upon to push Tinubu out of office.

Also several exhibits including witnesses statements he tendered to establish his allegations of irregularities, malpractices against the February 25 presidential election were rejected and discountenanced by the Tribunal.

Like the fate that befell Peter Obi, the court said several facts fundamentally required to support the petition were not provided by Atiku.

Among others, Atiku was said to have failed and neglected to name places where ballot boxes were snatched, the ways and manners the BVAS machine were manipulated and names of polling booths where alleged malpractices took place.

The petitioner who claimed to have polled majority of lawful votes was said to have failed to state in clear terms, the total lawful votes he claimed to have scored.

The court held that Atiku alleged that Tinubu did not score majority of lawful votes but refused to make the perceived lawful votes known in his petition to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal dismissed the allegations of over voting all over Nigeria by the petitioner adding that such pleadings run foul of the law because the specific places where the alleged over voting took place were not mentioned.

Atiku’s petition was also faulted on the ground that it introduced several facts and allegations in unlawful ways that caught the respondents unaware adding that the tactic employed was unfair and made him clever by half.

Among the offending new facts said to have been wrongfully introduced by Atiku were the allegations of criminal conviction, certificate forgery, dual citizenship of Guinea made against Tinubu outside the mode of filing petition.

Justice Stephen Jonah Adah who read another ruling on objections against the petition expunged several documents tendered by Atiku on the ground that the exhibits were made during the pendency of the petition.

The Tribunal held that the wrongful mode adopted by the PDP’s presidential candidate in the construction of the petition made several paragraphs of the petition liable for striking out for want of merit.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had declared Tinubu as winner of the February 25, 2023 presidential poll, an action that resulted in the litigation.

The Court made the pronouncement in its judgment on Wednesday and held that the petitioners failed to prove the fraud and drug allegations they made against Tinubu.

On the forfeiture of the sum of $460,000 to the US government over alleged complicity in drug-related offences, the panel held that the petitioners failed to prove that Tinubu was found guilty of any offence involving any act of dishonesty, adding that evidence before the court showed that the forfeiture order was in a civil and not criminal matter and ruled that Tinubu could not therefore be disqualified on the basis of his forfeiture of drug money in the United States.

The verdict was declared by Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel. According to the PEPT, Tinubu was previously cleared by the Nigeria Police Force of any criminal issues in the US, which came through an inquiry the police had made to US law enforcement.

In his ruling, Tsammani said the judgement of the US District in Northern Illinois which ordered the forfeiture of Tinubu’s $460,000 in a drugs-related case was in civil proceedings in which Tinubu was not a party.

Justice Tsammani ruled: “The order of forfeiture in Exhibit P5 on which the petitioners have relied does not qualify as a sentence of fine for an offence involving dishonesty or fraud within the confabulation of Section 137(d) of the 1999 constitution,” Tsammani said.

declared that the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has no special status over the other 36 states of the federation over the 25% required votes in the presidential poll held on February 25, 2023.

The panel said that FCT residents have no special privileges as the petitioners claimed and that the petitioners’ interpretation of Section 134(2)(b) of the 1999 constitution is “completely fallacious, if not outrightly ridiculous.”

As at the time of this report, the judgment was still being delivered even though a law expert who spoke to Nigerian Pilot on condition of anonymity said that “nothing much will come out of the verdict.”

He said: “It is not likely that the verdict will be different from the earlier one which dismissed Peter Obi’s petition. The court is not likely to give any victory to Atiku Abubakar.”

He added: “Of course the petitioners have right of appeal to the Supreme Court but will that not be a mere waste of time and resources?” (Nigerian Pilot)