It’s finally time for judgment. Nigerians are generally tense and worried.
In a statement released on Sunday, September 3rd, the Presidency revealed that President Bola Tinubu would be traveling to New Delhi, India for the G-20 Summit. Hours later, the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) announced that it had set a date to deliver judgement in petitions filed against the outcome of the 2023 presidential election, as reported by SAREWAHAUSA.
Interestingly, the PEPT indicated that the announcement of the verdict would be broadcast in real time.
Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) all filed petitions to challenge the result declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) after the presidential poll on February 25. Tinubu will not be present in the country when the tribunal decides whether to affirm or nullify his victory.
Nigerians are waiting with bated breath for the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led panel to give its conclusion. It may or may not be a coincidence that the tribunal set the judgement on a date the President would be out of the country.
With the tribunal’s ruling expected to be announced today, Wednesday, the tensions surrounding the 2023 presidential election—one of the most hotly contested and contentious since Nigeria’s restoration to democratic governance in 1999—have only increased.
Tensions are high all around the country right now.
The Department of State Services, DSS, issued a statement on Monday, September 4, revealing that it had unearthed plans by some elements in sections of the country to organise violent protests in order to tarnish the Federal Government, the same day the tribunal announced the date for its ruling.
Despite the DSS’s failure to directly link the alleged plot to the tribunal’s judgement, the language of the statement was remarkably similar to that of an earlier one released by the agency to warn Nigerians of plans by some politicians to form an interim government after the 2023 general elections, shortly before former President Muhammadu Buhari handed over to Tinubu on May 29.
“Intelligence reports suggest the plotters include certain politicians who are desperately mobilizing naive student leaders, ethnically oriented associations, young people, and disaffected groups for the planned action.
“The Service has identified the ring leaders of the plot as well as sustained monitoring around them in order to deter them from plunging the country into anarchy,” the DSS stated in a statement released on Monday, September 4.
Meanwhile, Tinubu presided over a National Security Council meeting at the State House in Abuja shortly before he left for India.
The specifics of the meeting’s discussion were not disclosed. However, many Nigerians have implied that there is some connection between the meeting and the tensions caused by the tribunal’s ruling.
The President is not concerned with the outcome of the Tribunal – The White House
Tensions are mounting as the deadline for the verdict approaches, but Tinubu’s spokesperson said the president is unconcerned about the outcome.
On Monday night’s episode of Channels Television’s Politics Today, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity Ajuri Ngelale made the remark.
Ngelale remarked, “He is not concerned because he is confident in his election victory.”
However, the spokesperson for the president continued, “The President sees no need to threaten judicial officers,” a subtle allusion to the controversial ‘All Eyes on the Judiciary’ billboards built by some Nigerians in anticipation of the tribunal’s judgment. He trusts the Nigerian judicial system and the wonderful men and women who sit on the panel to make conclusions based solely on the evidence in front of them, so he doesn’t see any reason to speculate about their motives.
Ngelale claims that Tinubu would keep doing his share to make sure our institutions are respected not just by him but by all actors no matter what the outcome of the ruling is.
The Presidency declared that Tinubu had won the poll, but the Labour Party quickly refuted this.
Obiora Ifoh, spokeswoman for the Labour Party, expressed optimism that the verdict will be favorable to the party and its presidential candidate, Obi,
We have no doubt that the court will rule in favor of the Labour Party and Peter Obi for president. We also have faith that the people’s will ultimately wins out.
Most Nigerians’ hopes and dreams will finally come true after so much anticipation. In a Whatsapp message to SAREWAHAUSA, Ifoh promised the legitimate election victor the return of the popularly-approved mandate from February 25.
Debo Ologunagba, the PDP’s official spokesman, was unavailable for comment on Tuesday.
Hearings, arguments, and petitions before the judge
Since adopting their final written addresses on August 1, the parties in the suit have been waiting for the tribunal to make a decision.
Tinubu of the APC received 8,794,726 votes, which is enough to win the presidency, as stated by INEC. With 6,984,520 votes, Atiku of the PDP emerged in second place, followed by Obi of the LP with 6,101,533.
Tinubu tied with Atiku’s 12 state victories. However, Obi was successful in eleven states and the FCT.
One of the main questions the tribunal must answer is whether or not Tinubu is still qualified to be President despite receiving fewer than 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT.
Atiku, Obi, and the APM have all filed petitions with the tribunal requesting that the 2023 presidential election outcome be overturned.
Atiku, represented by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Chris Uche, argued that Tinubu lacked eligibility to run for president on February 25 because of a ruling from a U.S. court ordering him to forfeit $460,000 for drug and money laundering-related offenses.
The PDP candidate requested a new election be held in a petition with the case number CA/PEPC/05/2023.
After receiving almost N355 billion for the conduct of the poll, Atiku and the PDP claim that the INEC violated provisions of the revised Electoral Act by neglecting to electronically submit the results of the election.
In his appeal designated CA/PEPC/03/2023, Obi asked the tribunal to overturn Tinubu’s victory, citing his suspected involvement in drug trafficking in the United States and his failure to receive at least 25 percent of the vote in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
Obi’s legal team, lead by Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, argues that Tinubu should not have been declared President because of the loss of $460,000 in the US and his inability to receive 25% of the votes cast in the FCT.
Legal counsel for Obi also claimed that Tinubu’s votes should be nullified because his running partner, Kashim Shettima, had been nominated for both the Borno Central Senatorial District and the vice presidential flagbearer of the All Progressives Congress (APC), in direct contravention of the Electoral Act.
Even while INEC blamed technical issues with the INEC Result Viewing, IReV, portal for the failure to post results, the LP candidate disputed this.
Instead, attorneys for Obi claim that INEC’s refusal to post the results was an intentional act of sabotage.
Obi is requesting that the tribunal either declare him the President-elect and force INEC to grant him a certificate of return, or nullify the election and order INEC to hold a new one.
According to the provisions of sections 131(c) and 142 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the APM said in its appeal that Tinubu’s candidacy was nullified by the withdrawal of Ibrahim Masari, who was previously nominated as the vice presidential candidate of the APC.
Approximately three weeks passed between when Masari announced his intention to withdraw, when he actually withdrew his nomination, and when Tinubu replaced him with Shettima, as reported by the APM.
The APM argued that Shettima was not eligible to contest as the vice presidential candidate of the APC as of February 25, when the election was conducted by INEC, because Tinubu’s candidature had lapsed at the time he nominated Shettima as Masari’s replacement. This would be a violation of Section 35 of the Electoral Act, 2022.
The party asked the tribunal to declare Tinubu’s presidential election votes invalid and to overturn INEC’s decision to grant him a Certificate of Return.
The legal teams for Tinubu, the APC, and the Independent National Electoral Commission are asking the tribunal to throw out the challenges to the results of the presidential election.
Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, now Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, contended that Tinubu’s forfeiture of $460,000 in the US was a civil matter and should not merit disqualification from the election when he adopted his final written remarks on behalf of the All Progressives Congress.
The FCT counts as the 37th state for electoral purposes, and Tinubu’s attorney, Wole Olanipekun, SAN, contended that the President’s failure to garner 25% of the vote in the territory should not invalidate his victory, which was another significant case against his client’s election.
Olanipekun argued that the petitions should be thrown down because they were without merit.
Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, an attorney for INEC, disputed petitioners’ claims that the election outcome was altered because INEC failed to submit results to the INEC IReV platform.
The INEC counsel told the tribunal that it was illogical for the petitioners to claim that a candidate must secure 25% of the votes in the FCT to be declared winner of the presidential poll, because the election had been conducted in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, as amended.
Focus on the court system
After the presidential election tribunal withheld its decision on August 1, billboards reading “All Eyes on the Judiciary” sprouted up in cities across the country.
After being ordered taken down by the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON) on August 15, the billboards were taken down amid much controversy.
The Association for Responsible Citizenship in Nigeria (ARCON) characterized the billboards as an attempt to “blackmail the Nigerian Judiciary, the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, and particularly the Honourable Justices of the Tribunal who are expected to discharge their judicial functions without fear or favor.”
However, when the panel issues its ruling today (Wednesday), all eyes will be on the Nigerian judicial system.
On Tuesday, September 5th, 2018, DAILY POST chatted with a few Nigerians on what they thought the verdict would be.
CRRAN President Olu Omotayo has stated that the tribunal’s decision should not be predicated on legal technicalities.
Omotayo argued that justice, fairness, and equity should underpin the verdict.
He stated, “There is a clear political difference in Nigeria. Political leanings strongly influence people’s expectations.
APC, PDP, and LP backers are all demanding that the ruling go their way. But just like in a football game, not every team will win. Ultimately, one side or the other will prevail.
However, rationale should underpin the final decision. Whatever ruling they come to, it must be founded on fundamental legal principles rather than arcane details. That is the minimum standard that every Nigerian should accept.
Justice does not flow in only one direction. Following the letter of the law is essential for achieving justice. The only piece of advice I can give to the tribunal’s judges is that they should make their decisions in accordance with the principles of justice, fairness, and equity, as well as the letter of the law.
Willy Ezugwu, secretary general of the Conference of Nigerian Political Parties (CNPP), told SAREWAHAUSA that the international community is watching the proceedings closely.
Nigerians aren’t the only ones keeping an eye on this. The eyes of the world are on the judicial system. With all the facts on the table, we are waiting to see what the tribunal decides,” Ezugwu added.
He also cautioned against relying on legal technicalities in making the decision.
“They need not base their decision on technicalities. Everyone is aware; no one can claim ignorance or incompetence on the part of the judicial system. He explained that this was why Nigerians were “crying, shouting, and pronouncing that all eyes are on the judges.”
admin
