BY GODWIN OBI
The Presidential Election Petitions Court delivered a 12-hour marathon judgment on Wednesday, throwing out the petitions of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM); the petitions of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its flag bearer, Atiku Abubakar; as well as the petitions of Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi.
The Tribunal dismissed the petitions of the three parties challenging the victory of President Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the February 25, 2023 poll.
The five-man panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani did not only dismiss the consolidated petitions of the PDP, the APM and the LP, the panel also clearly affirmed the victory of Tinubu, a former governor of Lagos State, in the presidential poll.
Justice Tsammani said, “This petition accordingly lacks merit. I affirm the return of Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the duly elected President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The parties are to bear their cost.
After much anticipation, the Tribunal delivered its judgment at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, a proceeding that was televised live from 9am to minutes past 9pm.
Some of the notable persons present at the proceeding crowded by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) include Vice-President Kashim Shettima of the APC, Chief of Staff Femi Gbajabiamila; and LP’s Julius Abure, among others.
Significantly, Obi and Atiku had observed previous proceedings of the Tribunal, were not in court on Wednesday. Tinubu was also not in court as he is away in India for the G-20 summit.
The Tribunal first delivered its verdict on the petitions of the APM, followed by the LP and the PDP.
Court Strikes Out APM’s Suit
In the case of the APM, the Tribunal dismissed the suit of the party seeking to nullify Tinubu’s election for lacking in merit and being incompetent.
Justice Tsammani, who read the judgment, held that issues the APM raised in its petition contained pre-election matters that could only be determined by the Federal High Court.
The court further upheld the preliminary objections of the respondents who challenged the competence of the suit.
Justice Tsammani noted that since the petition centred on the qualification of Tinubu to contest the presidential election, the APM ought to have gone to court within 14 days after Tinubu was nominated by the APC.
He held that since the cause of action bordered on a pre-election matter, the APM lacked the locus standi to challenge Tinubu’s nomination.
Furthermore, the court held that the Supreme Court had earlier decided that a political party does not have the right to challenge a nomination that was made by another political party.
The court noted that the main grouse of the APM was on the alleged invalid nomination of Tinubu’s then running mate, Shettima.
He further held that Section 84(3) of the Electoral Act, 2022, stipulates that political parties should not impose qualification criteria on a candidate, except as provided for in the constitution.
It held that where an election has already been conducted and the result declared, the qualification of a candidate could no longer be challenged on the basis of sections 131 and 137 of the Constitution.
‘INEC At Liberty To Prescribe Mode Of Results Transmission’
The Tribunal moved to the petitions of the Labour Party and ruled that the LP’s petition of irregularities in the 2023 presidential election was generic.
The court ruled that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was at liberty to decide the mode of transmission of election results during the presidential election on February 25, 2023.
The panel said according to Sections 52 and 65 of the Electoral Act 2022, INEC was at liberty to prescribe the manner in which election results were transmitted during the poll.
The Tribunal consequently dismissed the petition of the LP and Obi, which argued that the victory of Tinubu be annulled on the basis on the “failure” of the commission’s Results Viewing Portal (IReV) to upload election results electronically in real time.
ADVERTISEMENTS
