Nigeria’s Presidential Election Petition Court, sitting in the capital, Abuja, has dismissed the petitions filed by three opposition parties, the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), Labour Party (LP) and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging the election of president Bola Ahmed Tinubu, therefore, affirming his declaration as the President of Nigeria in the 25 February presidential elections.
In the court’s judgement, all the 7 Petitions filed by the opposition PDP’s candidate, Atiku Abubakar, were struck out. Among these were Atiku’s petition alleging that all over Nigeria there were incidences of over voting. The tribunal struck out the claims for lack of proof, saying it was vague.
Atiku’s allegations of double nomination raised against the Vice-President, Kashim Shettima, was also dismissed as false, and so stating that his nomination as president Tinubu’s running mate was valid. In a similar response to the ruling All Progressives Congress’s (APC) petition questioning Peter Obi’s nomination by LP, the court ruled that it was an internal party issue.
The court also struck out the petition of the APM, which was primarily hinged on same claims of Shettima’s double nomination, for lack of merit and abuse of the Court process. The court ruled that the petitioner, from the oral and documentary evidence, failed to establish any concrete reasons why the prayers should be granted.
Speaking on the allegation of the APC not conducting any primary election to nominate the Vice president, the court ruled that the petitioner erred as It is within the constitutional power of the president to nominate his running mate and the position of the petitioner is therefore discountenanced. The court concluded that, having resolved all the issues against the petitioner, “the petition is devoid of any merit”.
In its verdict on the petitions raised by the LP and its candidate, Peter Obi, that Tinubu did not have the necessary academic qualifications to contest the presidential elections, the court ruled that president Tinubu had the requisite academic qualifications to contest. The court also said the petitioners failed to prove their claims on fraud against President Tinubu.
The court ruled that the LP could not prove its claims of malpractice in the elections. It also said that the party’s claims that it won the elections but was denied victory by Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) manipulation of results was not supported by any evidence. According to the court, LP did not show with how much vote it won the election. One of the judges went further, referring to the results declared in some randomly selected states, to suggest that it could be said that any results manipulation was rather in favour of the LP.
On same claims, another judge said “It’s obvious that the petitioners were just fixated on the belief that they won the election without any cogent and credible evidence, and they did not even bother to place any such credible evidence before this court, were they expecting the court to go and get evidence on the street or from the market or to be persuaded or intimidated by threats on Social Media, that is not the way of the courts.”
The party’s claims that the INEC was unable to transmit election in real time does not depart from the Commission’s substantial compliance with the electoral act of the country, the court ruling declared.
One of the most anticipated ruling was on the claim by the LP that Tinubu’s inability to win 25% of the votes in the country’s Federal Capital Territory (FCT), within which Abuja is located, nullified his victory. A claim it said was based on a presumed special status granted the capital by the constitution. The court however ruled that the FCT does not enjoy special status to other states so no 2/3 votes required for a candidate to win is compulsorily in Abuja.
10 out of 13 witnesses presented by Peter Obi were declared not competent to testify in the hearing and the reports tendered by Mr Obi’s expert witnesses were described as lacking “probative value”. The reports of the European Union (EU) and Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) observer missions on the outcome of the 2023 election were also declared inadmissible
In the allegations made by the Labour Party that President Tinubu was not qualified to contest the presidential election in view of the $460,000 fine he paid in relation to narcotics charges in the United States, the court held that trial and conviction by a court is the only way to prove guilt.
The court added that the case was a civil forfeiture case as it was a unique remedy that rests on the property being the target and not the person. The case was in the civil docket of the United States North district court Illinois. It pointed out that “Section 249 of the Evidence Act provides that a previous conviction may be proved if a copy containing the charge, the evidence, and the fingerprint of the alleged crime is signed by a police officer from the country where the crime was alleged to have been committed”.
The court’s ruling may not be the final settlement of all petitions against the presidential elections as it is expected that the parties will go on to the country’s Apex court for a final determination of their claims.
The PDP has issued a statement saying that it rejects the judgement. The statement further said that “the PDP, as a law-abiding political Party, will with our lawyers, have a comprehensive review of the Judgment and decide on the next line of action within the ambit of the law.”
