INEC closes defence in Atiku’s petition with one witness

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) called one witness that testified in the petition filed by the candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, challenging the outcome of the 2023 presidential election. At the resumed proceeding on Monday, INEC tendered four documentary exhibits in evidence, which include a letter dated July 6, 2022, which the Vice President, Kashim Shettima, wrote to notify it of his decision to withdraw as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, for the Borno Central Senatorial election. Led in evidence by INEC’s lead counsel, Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, the witness, Mr. Lawrence Bayode, who is a Deputy Director of ICT at the Commission, tendered the letter and its accompanying certification, which was admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits RA-1 and RA-2. Under cross-examination by counsel to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Chief Olanipekun, SAN, the witness, insisted that the presidential election held on February 25, was “free, fair, credible and conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act.” The witness also told counsel to APC, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the witness said that the technical glitch that was experienced on Election Day did not affect the actual scores of all the presidential candidates, which he said remained intact. He further told the court that the results of the presidential election were not electronically collated, saying it was done manually. “INEC does not have an electronic collation system,” he insisted, adding that INEC had few days to the presidential poll, and announced that electronic transmission of results of the election would not be feasible. However, while being cross-examined by counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, the witness, told the court that the European Union, EU, Observation Mission was accredited by INEC to monitor the 2023 general elections. On if he was aware that the EU has released its final report on the election, the witness, said: “Yes I am aware, but I have not seen it.” When he was shown a certified copy of the EU’s report and asked to read from a portion of it, the Respondents raised objections. Though they opposed the admissibility of the report as part of the proof of evidence in the case, Justice Haruna Tsammani-led’s five-member panel of the court admitted it in evidence as Exhibit RA-6. The witness, read a paragraph in the report where the EU stated that 2023 was not “a transparent and inclusive election” as promised by the INEC. He also read a portion of the report that stated that “only 31% of results uploaded in I-REV was formally or mathematically correct.” However, he maintained that technological innovations that INEC introduced into the electoral process were to guarantee transparency and integrity of the results. Also, the lead counsel to Tinubu, informed the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, its readiness to open his defence to petitions seeking to nullify his client’s election, on Tuesday. Tribunal admits EU final report, faulting Tinubu’s election. The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) Monday, admitted as exhibit, the final report of the European Union Election Observer Mission, which faulted the conduct and outcome of the 2023 presidential election that produced President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and others. The report tendered by the former Vice President and Presidential candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) in the February 25 presidential election, Atiku Abubakar was admitted as exhibit in spite of vehement objections by President Bola Tinubu, All Progressive Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). In the report, the EU election observer mission claimed that the presidential election did not show credibility, fairness, and transparency in the ways and manners it was conducted by INEC. The report tendered through INEC’s sole witness and Director of Information Technology (IT), Dr. Lawrence Bayode said only 31 percent of the presidential election result was uploaded into INEC’s result viewing portal. Before the admission of the report, Atiku through his lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche SAN had applied that cross-examination of the INEC’S witness must be kick-started by Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress APC in view of their common interests against Atiku’s petition. The application was however bluntly opposed by Tinubu and APC through their lead counsel, Wole Olanipekun SAN, and Prince Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi SAN respectfully. However, the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led panel admitted it as evidence.

Tribunal: Atiku tenders statisticians’ reports against Tinubu

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) on Wednesday admitted as exhibits, three sets of reports prepared by a group of Statisticians on the electoral forms used during the last presidential election. Atiku’s Subpoened witness, PW21, a renowned Statistician, Samuel Oduntan made these reports available during his evidence-in-chief led by counsel to Atiku, Eyitayo Jegede SAN. Inspite of objections by the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC, Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress APC against the testimony of the witness, the Presiding Justice of the Court, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani admitted the three reports as exhibits. At Wednesday’s proceedings, former NBA President, Abubakar Mahmud SAN, Wole Olanipekun SAN and Lateef Fagbemi SAN conducted the case of INEC, Tinubu and APC respectfully. Besides opposing the admission of the documents, the three respondents also kicked against the bid to consider the reports as being read in the open court. Meanwhile, Justice Tsammani has fixed June 15 for further hearing of the petition especially the cross examination of the witness

INEC Chairman evading our subpoena, Obi tells Tribunal

The Labour Party, LP and it’s presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, on Wednesday revealed that their attempt to serve the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Chairman, Prof Yakubu Mahmoud with a subpoena has been abortive. The Petitioners, through their Counsel, Livy Uzoukwu SAN, drew the attention of the court to the subpoena which was to furnish them with certain documents.  He added that he spoke to the lead counsel to INEC, Abubakar Mahmoud who promised to help out. He therefore, asked for an adjournment until tomorrow. “We have drawn the attention of Abubakar Mahmoud SAN on the failed attempt to subpoena INEC and the office of the INEC to produce certain documents despite efforts of the bailiff of the court. “He asked for a copy of the subpoena which I couldn’t produce at that time, but he suggested I give to any member of the team in court . “I am confident we will do the needful and we will continue tomorrow. Responding, Counsel to INEC, Kemi Pinhero, SAN, told the court that the petitioner’s counsel should stop using INEC as ‘a weeping boy.’ “It is not correct that the office of the INEC chairman refused to be served, but PDP served several documents and received replies,” she said. He added that it has become the habit of the petitioners each time they want an adjournment to find a blame on INEC. “It has become a habit, whenever they want an adjournment, they will look for someone to whip. I have no privy that he had any discussion with AB Mahmoud. “We have no ideal of subpoena served and the refusal. PDP served us, we received and file our reply. “Everytime the matter came up, they keep saying INEC is refusing a document.  “If they want an adjournment, they should ask for it and we will not be objecting. The reason on not accepting or refusing service is absolutely not correct. It is very uncharitable,” INEC defended. Other respondents’ counsel however, did not object to the prayer for adjournment. Meanwhile, the five-man panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani adjourned until tomorrow (Thursday) for further hearing of the petition.