By 
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has asked the Supreme Court to dismiss an appeal by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar seeking to nullify his election victory.
Tinubu was represented by a team of 17 lawyers comprising 10 Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs).
The President in a 42-page brief of argument urged the apex court to affirm what he termed as “well considered decision of the Court of Appeal,” which while sitting as the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) had on September 6, dismissed the joint petition that Atiku and his party entered against him.
My victory genuine – Tinubu
Insisting he was validly returned by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the winner of the presidential poll that held on February 25, Tinubu told the apex court that by statistics, he garnered one-quarter/25% of the total votes in 29 states of the federation.
He told the court that the former Vice President and the PDP only managed to secure 25% of the total votes in 21 states of the federation, “as against the constitutional requirement of 24.7 states, which is the mathematical results of two-thirds of the 36 states of the federation and the FCT (making 37).
Tinubu maintained that having secured the highest number of valid votes cast and having fulfilled all constitutional requirements in that regard, INEC had no option than to declare him as the winner of the presidential contest.
He told the apex court that Atiku and the PDP, being dissatisfied with the outcome of the election, on March 21, approached the PEPC “on trumped up allegations of non-compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, corrupt practices, non-scoring of majority of lawful votes cast at the election and non-qualification of the Respondent.”
‘Fresh evidence’
President Tinubu’s reply came barely three days after Atiku and the PDP applied for permission of the Supreme Court to tender fresh evidence to establish the allegation that he submitted forged documents to the INEC.
Specifically, Atiku sought the leave of the court to tender Tinubu’s academic records which he said, were handed over to him by the Chicago State University (CSU) October 2, 2023.
However, in the process he filed to counter Atiku’s appeal, President Tinubu averred that “the hyperbolic character of the forgoing allegations was exposed by the petition itself, which had no facts in support thereof”.
He said: “Starting from the allegation of non-qualification of the Respondent, all that the Appellants submitted to the lower court through their petition was that the 2nd Respondent (Tinubu) was at the time of the election not qualified to contest the election not having the constitutional threshold.”
He told the Supreme Court that Atiku and his party failed to explain what they meant by “constitutional threshold” till all the respondents in the matter were done with filing of their replies to the petition.
Tinubu argued: “It was at this point that they rolled out their drums of cooked up allegations of discrepancies in the 2nd Respondent’s academic qualifications, dual nationality and sundry bemusing allegations from the backdoor.
“While they also claimed to have won the highest number of votes cast at the election, as against INEC’s declaration, throughout their petition, they did not suggest an alternative score which they considered correct, whether for themselves or the Respondent.
“Though they had alleged that the election was riddled with non-compliance and corrupt practices, the paragraphs of their petition putting up these allegations were nothing short of vague, imprecise, generic and nebulous.
“For these allegations which ought to have been specifically demonstrated through facts and figures like polling units and numbers, the Appellants, through their petition, chose to regale the lower court and the Respondents with breath taking suspense, by stating that the said facts will be disclosed in their statistician’s report which was not part of the petition filed.
“It is only commonsensical that the Respondents will only be able to respond to the facts in the petition and not on the crucial, albeit anticipated statistician’s report, since even the devil himself knows not the heart of man.”
27 witnesses
Continuing, President Tinubu told the apex court that out of the 27 witnesses called by the former VP, 13 of them did not have their witness statements front-loaded with the petition.
“With these, it was obvious that the Appellants did not intend to prosecute a petition, but rather, to venture into some form of blockbuster, laced with thrilling suspense, stunning surprises and ecstatic hide and seek recreational activities; and these necessitated series of objections from the Respondents, challenging the competence of the petition, as well as the itemised nebulous paragraphs of same, the statement on oath of these subpoenaed witnesses, which were not front-loaded with the petition and tons of documents sought to be tendered, which were either irrelevant or unconforming to the mandatory rules of admissibility.”
President Tinubu told the apex court that whereas Atiku raised issue of non-transmission of results, all the witnesses he brought before the PEPC, “agreed that the election went very smoothly, where INEC complied with all the prescribed procedures.”
He, therefore, urged the Supreme Court “to dismiss Atiku’s appeal as lacking in merit and to affirm the election and return of the respondent by INEC as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, having scored highest number of lawful votes cast and fulfilling all constitutional requirements.”
Tinubu contended that the appellants did not demonstrate any reason why the Supreme Court should disturb any of the findings of the lower court, “which with all modesty, are rooted in law and perfect demonstration of scholarship.”
More so, President Tinubu noted that even though Atiku challenged his qualifications, however, in his alternative prayer in court, he requested to have a run-off election with him.
“The logical conclusion from this approbative and reprobative posture of the Appellants is that deep down in their hearts, they are convinced that the 2nd Respondent won the election, but have decided to embark on this voyage of abuse of court process,” Tinubu added.
He, therefore, prayed the Supreme Court to dismiss Atiku’s appeal marked: SC/CV/935/2023.
Cited as 1st to 3rd Respondents in the appeal were INEC, Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) respectively.
No date has been fixed for the Supreme Court to commence hearing on the presidential dispute.
Apapa’s LP alleges Obi’s name discrepancies
Meanwhile, National Publicity Secretary of the Lamidi Apapa-led faction of the Labour Party (LP), Abayomi Arabambi, has alleged a discrepancy in the certificates of the presidential candidate of the party, Peter Obi.
Arabambi made this allegation while speaking in an interview on AIT programme.
Obi, it would be recalled, had Wednesday challenged Tinubu to come clean on the controversies around his academic certificates.
Taking on Obi however on similar ground, Arabambi said he was among the people who screened Obi before the party’s presidential primary.
According to Arabambi, the name on Obi’s academic certificate from the University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN) contradicts the name on his National Youth Service Corps certificate.
Arabambi said: “I was part of the people who did the screening for him. In the form EC9 we gave him, he wrote that he attended the University of Nigeria Nsukka and that he finished his youth service but unfortunately, in the final submission of the form, he only submitted his school certificate.
“So, something is fishy, and I want to say the name the school sent for mobilization was not what was written on his NYSC certificate, and he knows that.
“For us, we don’t know the true identity of Peter Obi even in the Labour Party because everything was shrouded in secrecy at that time between him and Abure in Asaba.
“You know we were rushing because we had just a day to do our presidential primary, and that was why he was able to get away with it, but we have it on record that Obi’s name on his NYSC certificate and the one on his University of Nigeria, Nsukka certificate are different,” he said. (Blueprint)
Comments