APC’s petition challenging Obi’s LP membership incompetent- Tribunal

The Presidential Tribunal sitting in Abuja on Wednesday in its final ruling, declared APC suit challenging Peter Obi as a bona fide member of the Labour Party as incompetent. Justice Abba declared that Obi emerging as the flagbearer of the Labour Party was an internal affair and lacks competence in the suit.   The Tribunal also touched on the issue of non-joinder of Atiku Abubakar who came second and wondered how Obi & LP’s petition could be effectively determined without joining the candidate who placed second in the polls.

Tight security measures in place as Presidential Tribunal readies for verdict

The Court of Appeal Complex, situated in the Three Arms Zone along Shehu Shagari Way, Central Business District of Abuja, is currently under heightened security as the Presidential Election Petition Court prepares to deliver its judgment. Additionally, there has been an extensive security presence at the entry routes to the Federal Capital Territory’s satellite towns leading to the city centre. Armed soldiers and military personnel have set up checkpoints, causing some commuters to experience delays. This increased security presence persists despite the ongoing NLC warning strike, which is in its final day. The Tribunal is set to deliver its judgment on three cases challenging the outcome of the presidential election held on February 25. This decision comes approximately a month after the court heard the closing arguments from the parties involved in the petitions and only two weeks before the expiration of the statutory 180-day timeframe for hearing and determining cases filed in March. The five-member panel of the court, led by Haruna Tsammani, had reserved judgment on the petitions after concluding the closing arguments in early August. Multiple security operatives from various branches, including the armed forces, police, Department of State Service (DSS), and the Civil Defence, are currently stationed along all routes leading to the Court of Appeal Complex. Similar security formations are in place within the court complex itself. In a statement issued on Monday, the Chief Registrar of the Court, Mr. Umar Bangari, assured that all necessary measures have been taken to ensure the smooth and secure delivery of judgment in the three pending petitions. He explained that access to the courtroom will be restricted, allowing only invited members of political parties and the general public to enter to prevent congestion and security breaches. Furthermore, media outlets interested in broadcasting the judgment live will be permitted to do so at no cost to the court. As of 7.30 a.m., security personnel were conducting checks on lawyers and journalists entering the premises. Key government buildings, including the Federal Secretariat, the National Assembly Complex, and the access points to the Presidential Villa, were heavily guarded by security personnel. The three petitions challenging President Tinubu’s victory were filed separately by Atiku Abubakar of the PDP, Peter Obi of the Labour Party, and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM). President Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) was declared the winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), receiving 8.8 million votes, defeating 17 other candidates in a largely competitive race. Atiku secured second place with 6,984,520 votes, followed by Obi with a total of 6,101,533 votes, according to INEC’s official results.

Presidential Tribunal to announce verdict Sept 6, okays live broadcast

Putting an end to two weeks of suspense, the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) has officially confirmed that it will deliver its judgment on Wednesday, September 6. This landmark decision comes after three petitions contesting the victory of Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the 2023 presidential election. The Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Umar Mohammed Bangari, disclosed this important date in Abuja on Monday, putting to rest the speculations that had been swirling around the case. Bangari assured that the court is taking every measure to ensure a smooth and trouble-free delivery of the judgment in response to the three petitions. These petitions were filed by Abubakar Atiku, the Presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP); Peter Obi, his counterpart from the Labour Party; and the Allied People Movement (APM) under the APC umbrella. In an effort to maintain order and security, Bangari mentioned that stringent security measures have been implemented. Access to the courtroom will be restricted, permitting only invited members of political parties and the general public to enter. This approach is intended to prevent overcrowding and potential security breaches. Furthermore, Bangari announced that interested television stations would be allowed to broadcast the proceedings live, without any associated costs to the court. However, to ensure security and crowd control, certain restrictions will be in place around the court premises. A notable decision by the court was to reserve judgment on the petitions submitted by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) and Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party, scheduling them for delivery on the same day as Peter Obi’s Labour Party petition. Notably, last week, the court refuted the claims that it had set September 16 as the date for the judgment, clarifying the actual date as September 6.

Presidential Tribunal: Atiku, Obi, Tinubu to present final addresses

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja is nearing the conclusion of its proceedings, with Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Mr. Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP) set to adopt their final written addresses on Tuesday. These addresses precede the judgment date for all petitions related to the February 25 presidential election, including the challenge against President Bola Tinubu’s victory. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the election, with 8,794,726 votes, defeating Atiku Abubakar who secured 6,984,520 votes and Mr. Obi with 6,101,533 votes. Disputing the results, both Atiku and Obi filed separate petitions, claiming victory and challenging Tinubu’s eligibility to run for the presidency. The petitioners seek to have the court declare that President Tinubu did not obtain the majority of lawful votes and to withdraw his Certificate of Return. They are also calling for a fresh presidential election, excluding Tinubu, whom they contend was ineligible to participate in the first place. Obi presented 13 witnesses and various documentary exhibits, while Atiku produced 27 witnesses and additional evidence before the court. INEC and President Tinubu each had one witness in their defense, and the APC did not produce any witnesses. The Respondents, including INEC, President Tinubu, and APC, have all submitted written addresses urging the court to dismiss the petitions for lack of merit. They argue that the petitioners failed to prove their allegations beyond reasonable doubt, as required by the law. Atiku’s joint petition with the PDP (marked: CA/PEPC/05/2023) asserts that Tinubu’s declaration as the winner of the presidential election was invalid due to non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, and contends that he was not duly elected by the majority of lawful votes. The proceedings continue as the nation awaits the judgment that will determine the outcome of the closely contested presidential election.

Tribunal: Fireworks resume July 3 as Atiku and Obi seek to dethrone Tinubu

The 2023 Presidential Elections may have come and gone, but the legal fireworks fanned by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi continue to fiercely burn. Suffice it to say that it has been a topsy-turvy three weeks at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) as the aggrieved parties battled to drive home their case challenging the declaration of Ahmed Bola Tinubu as the winner of the said election. On May 8th, the presidential election petition kicked off with five petitions from different political parties which were later consolidated. In the buildup of the full-blown hearing of the petitions, there was mild drama as two aggrieved parties Action Alliance (AA) and the Action Peoples Party (APP) withdrew their petitions, during the pre-hearing sessions of the petitions. However, Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Alliance Peoples Movement (APM) continued with the quest to upturn the outcome of the presidential election.   The petitioners were given three weeks to prove their case, after the pre-election reports were delivered on 23rd May 2023, as time allocated for hearing, calling of witnesses and cross-examinations were stated for easy conduct of proceedings. On July 23rd, Mr Obi and LP closed their case after calling 13 witnesses as against the 50 witnesses registered in their pre-hearing schedule, amongst which they tendered documents, and the total number of registered voters and Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs) collected in 32 states in the lead up to the presidential polls to aid their case. All their witnesses who were party agents and INEC officials, submitted that accreditation of voters was seamless, but transmission of Presidential election results was difficult, adding that they were made to sign the forms EC8As under duress. According to the witnesses, all the Labour Party agents totalled 133,000 as against the 176,974 polling units across the country, and they insisted that Peter Obi should be declared winner because he had the most results which were not uploaded as promised by INEC. Peter Obi and the Labour Party also tendered a report through a subpoenaed witness, Claretta Ogar, who is a cloud engineer and architect and an employee of Amazon Web Services Incorporated, USA. According to the Star witness, the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election did not experience any glitch that could have affected the e-transmission of results on February 25, 2023. The report specifically provides details on the health status of the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election. The document, totaling six copies were admitted by the court amid objections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and the All Progressive Congress (APC). Also, two subpoenaed witnesses of the Labour Party and Peter Obi, contradicted each other on the powers and responsibilities of the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA, as related to the February 25, 2023 general elections. Chebuike Ngwoke, a digital cyber-security expert, commissioned to do a cyber-security and risk analysis of the election by the Labour Party, told the court that the International System for Standardization, ISO Certification, is expected to be issued by the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA and to the Independent National Electoral Commission in line with the 2007 Act that established it.  However, another subpoenaed witness of Obi, Emmanuel Edet, a legal officer from NITDA contradicted the position that there was no provision in the NITDA Act that gave the agency that role when he was crossed examined by Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Counsel to Tinubu. On the part of Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), they had on the 21st of March filed their petitions challenging the emergence of President Bola Tinubu in the February 25 elections. Closing their case on Friday 23rd June, called a total of 27 witnesses as against 100 submitted in the pre-hearing schedule to prove their case, amongst other documents tendered. However, speaking to reporters, lead counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Chris Uche SAN, said that the documents tendered took the place of the remaining 73 witnesses. Some of the notable witnesses called were three Presiding Officers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) who told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that the refusal of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) to transmit the presidential election results on Election Day frustrated their jobs. The Officers, who were testifying on subpoena, admitted that the results of the Senate and the House of Representatives were transmitted unhindered and that the problems of technical glitches arose at the point of transmitting only the presidential poll results. The three witnesses are Janet Nuhu Turaki, Christopher Bulus Ardo and Victoria Sani who served as INEC’S Presiding Officers at Yobe, Bauchi and Katsina States, respectfully. Also among the testifiers was Hitler Uwala, who is a forensic Analyst and he tendered 7 volumes of reports based on the 110 BVAS machines inspected.  Under the evidence in chief, Uwala told the court that the results contained in the 110 BVAS machines he inspected were deleted. However, while under cross-examination by the INEC counsel, he admitted that he was not in Abuja when the elections were conducted and that nothing was wrong with the BVAS machine when he inspected them. He added that he didn’t interview any of the election presiding officers and does not know if anything was wrong with the BVAs machine on Election Day. INEC further told the court that the 110 BVAS machines inspected in the Federal Capital Territory constitute only 3.5% out of the 3163 devices allocated to Abuja and less than 0.06% of the total number of BVAS deployed across Nigeria. To verify the witness’ claims on deleting of results, INEC’s lawyer brought four BVAS devices for the witness to inspect but he refused saying it was professionally wrong to do that as the figures might have been tampered with. Uwala added that he can’t identify the BVAs machine given to him as

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.