The Nation Newspaper

Tag: PEPC

  • PEPC judgement and Nigeria’s future

    PEPC judgement and Nigeria’s future

    It is not surprising that Nigerians have seemed to limit themselves to ruminating over the judicial implications of the September 6 Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) judgement in the three suits filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Labour Party (LP), and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM). Gradually, however, the focus may be starting to shift from pure legalism to the more overarching issue of Nigeria’s future. That shift may be slow and exasperating, and can sometimes create more complications, but it is nevertheless perceptible. First and foremost, the PEPC judgement has wider implications for jurisprudence, a fact that has been reiterated in the media and especially among lawyers, including dissenting and prejudiced lawyers.

    The length of the judgement, all of 798 pages, and the about 12 hours it took to read it, carved a juridical niche in Nigeria. In summary, the petitioners proved nothing, as their final written addresses ominously presaged. They could not prove double nominations of the APC ticket, nor cast provable doubt on the qualification of the winner of the election, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, nor yet show electoral malpractices. They also demonstrated farcical understanding of the so-called special status of Abuja and also the jurisprudential value of the promise by INEC to use the result viewing portal, IReV. The petitioners also did not appreciate how to deploy the law of evidence to underscore their arguments. Though many commentators declined to read the judgement, perhaps on account of its length, or simply because they chose ab initio to believe a lie, the five justices encountered no difficulty whatsoever in coming to a unanimous decision to dismiss the petitions with significant and exemplary fines.

    However, apart from the juridical import of the PEPC judgement, and notwithstanding the skepticism of analysts and lawyers deliberately acting mala fide, the outcome of the cases is bound to have far-reaching impact on Nigeria in the years ahead. Had the judgement validated the LP’s tenuous claim of victory, for instance, it would have canonised ethnic politics and ingrained it into the body politic. Mr Obi’s presidential campaign was largely targeted at his ethnic group whether in his native Southeast or clusters of his ethnic compatriots wherever they might be found in the country. His tactic was also deliberate, mischievous, ruthless and remorseless. His tacticians probably suspected that since the APC opted for same-faith ticket, he had free reins to exploit the country’s religious sensibility to farm the Christian vote and couple it with ethnic vote to create a groundswell capable of sweeping him into the State House. His calculations were tactically sound but immoral and inherently destabilising. Given the country’s ethnic and religious pastiche, that tactics was unlikely to work. But if the PEPC had validated his election, credit would have been given to the exploitation of religious and ethnic factors. In the years ahead, candidates will now be reluctant farming ethnic and religious votes so flagrantly.

    Read Also: Why we agree with lead judgment, by four PEPC justices

    The PEPC judgement has also exposed and defined in bolder and shocking reliefs the character and politics of the candidates. The expositions are so revelatory that their impact goes beyond the gloominess of defeat and the exhilaration of victory. It is not known how President Bola Tinubu would take a devastating electoral loss, considering how immune he claims to be against electoral loss since he cut his political teeth. He hosts a permanent grin on his face, and may perhaps take losses with perfect equanimity; but until it happens, no one can predict the depth or magnitude of his reaction. But for Mr Obi and ex-vice president Atiku Abubakar, their reactions to their losses have altered public perceptions of their politics, mettle and judgement in ways impossible to measure.

    By reacting so badly to their losses, the LP and PDP candidates may have demonstrated their opportunism, superficial appreciation of democracy, and lack of interest in upholding the constitution. Alhaji Atiku may be chafing under serial electoral losses, perhaps also suspecting that he could never contest again on account of his age; but for Mr Obi, this was his first major loss as a presidential candidate, making it incomprehensible that he would risk his political future so casually to claim an election he actually stood no chance of winning. Some analysts suggest that Mr Obi’s intransigence is designed to sustain his political relevance, nurture his supporters’ loyalty by gratifying their childish desires, and raise his stock in public estimation. On the contrary, having short-sightedly corralled ethnic votes and accentuated the country’s fierce religious divides, Mr Obi has capped his unsteady and superficial appreciation of democracy with a questionable display as a bad loser, and virtually shown just how poorly equipped he is for national leadership.

    The PEPC judgement has also shown in unquantifiable ways that the judiciary can indeed withstand attacks and rise above prejudices and the mundane. More, given the unanimity of the judgement, the suavity and fluidity of the reasoning upon which they bludgeoned the puny efforts of the losing candidates, and the emphatic manner and clear conscience with which they came to their decisions, it is unavoidable that Nigeria must revisit its leadership recruitment process. Too many Nigerian leaders have come up short in reckoning. Had either Alhaji Atiku or Mr Obi won, the country would never have discovered their ideational failings, lack of democratic conviction, and almost total absence of leadership character. Hopefully, the next election cycle will probably sieve out most of the current frontrunners, including the 2023 PDP and LP candidates, and undoubtedly throw up far more nonnatural factors that will shape the country’s future.

  • Why we agree with lead judgment, by four PEPC justices

    Why we agree with lead judgment, by four PEPC justices

    The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) judgment of September 6 on the three surviving petitions filed against the last presidential election not only affirmed the victory of President Bola Tinubu, it did so by a unanimous decision of its five justices. ADEBISI ONANUGA and ROBERT EGBE report that while Justice Haruna Tsammani delivered the lead judgments, four others Justice Stephen Adah, Justice Misitura Bolaji-Yusuf, Justice Moses Ugo and Justice Abba Mohammed were in “full agreement.

    Justice Stephen Adah

    I am in full agreement with the lead judgment delivered by my learned brother Haruna Simon Tsammani, JCA in these three consolidated Petitions which are petitions No: CA/PEPC/03/2023,  CA/PEPC/04/2023;  CA/PEPC/05/2023.

    These Petitions were filed against the election into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which election was conducted in Nigeria on 25th February 2023.

    I agree also with the consolidated rulings on the various objections and other interlocutory applications relating to the competence of witnesses and the documents tendered in the three Petitions.

    I also agree with the reasoning and the conclusions arrived at the rulings on the preliminary objections and the substantial issues raised therein.

    In any concluded Election, there are bound to be a winner and losers. While the winner celebrates victory, an aggrieved loser may come before the Court to ventilate his grievances. This is made possible by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) which in Section 6 empowers Courts to determine disputes, including election disputes.

    It is well settled that an election Petition by nature is sui generis, of its own kind or class. It is not like going to Court to make a claim of debt, contract or tort. It has its own character and it is unique by its nature. The slightest non-compliance with a procedural step which otherwise could either be cured or waived in ordinary civil proceedings could result in a fatal consequence to the Petition.

    Election Petition as a special proceeding is specifically regulated by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the Electoral Act and other Rules of procedure such as the Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules and Practice Direction of the Honourable President of the Court of Appeal for the hearing of the Election Petition and the Election Petition Appeals.

    By Section 285(5) of the Constitution, an Election Petition shall be filed within 21 days after the date of the declaration of result of the Election; and by Section 285(6) thereof an Election Tribunal shall deliver its judgment in writing within 180 days. These time lines are sacrosanct and cannot be extended by the Court.

    It is trite that under the 1st Schedule of the Electoral Act, the election petition to be filed is well regulated. See Paragraph 4(5), (6) of the Electoral Act, 2022 which provides as follows:

    “(S) The election petition shall be accompanied by- (a) A list of the witnesses that the petitioner intends to call in proof of the petition, (b) Written statements on oath of the witnesses, and (c) Copies or list of every document to be relied on at the hearing of the petition.

    (6) A petition which fails to comply with subparagraph (5) shall not be accepted for filing by the Secretary.

    (7) An election petition, which does not comply with subparagraph (1) or a Provision of that subparagraph is defective and may be struck out by the tribunal or Court. “

    The word ‘Shall’ used in this Legislation makes it mandatory for a Petitioner to comply with that provision of the law. Failure to comply is fatal.

    Election Petitions are fought on pleadings, competent and credible witnesses. Where a Petition is deficient in pleadings and evidence, it is difficult to prove the Petition. In the instant Petitions, the Petitioners’ pleadings were deficient. While they complained of non-compliance with the Electoral Act against 1st respondent, their own Petitions were massively deficient in compliance with the Act.

    The lead judgment has elaborately dealt with these issues. When a Court is called upon to determine an election dispute, he is called upon to do justice. Our notion of doing justice is not that of doing justice according to the whims and caprices of the judges or the parties. It must be justice according to law. Justice according to law is also that which is neither based on technicality nor justice according to the suggestive clout of pressure groups, but such as substantially meets the demands of justice. This, with all respect, is what we have done in the lead judgment.

    I therefore concur with the leading judgment that these three consolidated Petitions having not been proved are hereby dismissed.

    I abide by the consequential orders as made in the lead judgment.

    Justice Misitura Bolaji-Yusuf

    I have read the lead the rulings and the judgments of my learned brother, HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, JCA in the above consolidated petitions. I agree with his reasoning and conclusion in the ruling and judgment in each petition and adopt same as mine. I add a few words for emphasis.

    Read Also: UAE lifts visa restriction on Nigerians

    Ground 1 of the petition is that the 2nd respondent was, at time of the election, not qualified to contest the election. The 1st complaint under this ground is that “the purported sponsorship of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents by the 4th Respondent was rendered invalid by reason of the 3rd Respondent knowingly allowing himself to be nominated as the Vice-Presidential Candidate whilst he was still a Senatorial Candidate for the Borno Central Constituency.” The controversy about the 3rd Respondent knowingly allowing himself to be nominated in more than one constituency was the subject matter in P.D.P V. INEC & ORS (2023) LPELR- 60457(SC). The Supreme Court per OKORO, JSC, AUGIE, JSC, OGUNWUMIJU, JSC and AGIM, JSC in their concurring opinions held that the 3rd respondent having withdrawn his nomination and personally delivered the notice of the withdrawal to his party (The respondent in this petition) on 6th July, 2022, he was no longer a candidate for the Borno Central Constituency Senatorial election and his subsequent nomination as the Vice-Presidential Candidate for the presidential election was not multiple nomination.

    The opinion of the Supreme Court per OKORO, JSC, AUGIE, JSC, OGUNWUMIJU, JSC and AGIM, JSC is not a comment or observation made in passing. It is an exposition of the law on withdrawal of a candidate from an election and the allegation that the 3rd respondent knowingly allowed himself to be nominated as the Vice-Presidential Candidate whilst he was still a Senatorial Candidate for the Borno Central Constituency.

    The 2nd complaint is that the 2nd respondent was at the time of the election not qualified to contest for the office of the president as he was fined the sum of $460,000 for an offence involving dishonesty, namely narcotics trafficking by the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in Case no. 93C 4483 on 4/10/1993. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the order of forfeiture made by the court is a fine under Section 137(1) (d) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    It is a settled principle of interpretation that where the words used in the provisions of the Constitution are clear and unambiguous, same must be given their plain and ordinary meaning unless to do so will lead to absurdity. The context in which the word “SENTENCE” is used in Section 137(1) (d) of the Constitution connotes a formal pronouncement awarding punishment after conviction for an offence. Conviction is a finding of guilt after an indictment, arraignment and trial.

    Therefore, the words “sentence”, “imprisonment” and “fine” used in Section 137(1) (d) of the Constitution definitely connotes only a punishment imposed on a defendant following an indictment, trial and conviction for an offence.

    In civil forfeiture or a non-conviction-based fo1eiture proceeding, the government only needs to show by preponderance of evidence that the property is a proceed of crime or was used to facilitate a crime. Criminal forfeiture on the other hand is seizure of a property connected with a crime after obtaining conviction and as part of sentence or punishment for the crime. Civil forfeiture is not a verdict of guilt after an indictment, trial and conviction.

    A forfeiture order by a foreign court can only be accepted and recognized by a court in Nigeria for the purpose of Section 137(1) (d) of the Constitution if it is made after an indictment, trial and conviction and properly proved as required by Section 249 of the Evidence Act. In addition, the conviction and sentence must be shown to have been a product of due process of law. Compliance with due process of law has to be determine by the procedure and standard set by Section 36 (5) and (6) of our Constitution. The forfeiture order being relied on by the petitioners has not been shown to be a result of a process similar to the one set by our Constitution for trial of a defendant for an offence

    The 3rd ground of the petition is that the 2nd respondent was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election having not obtained 25o/o of the votes in FCT.

    The interpretation of Section 134 (2) (b) of the Constitution being urged on us by the petitioners is an unjust manipulation of the Constitution to create inequality of votes. It negates the principles of Equality and Justice, democracy and social justice and participation of the people in their government enshrined in our Constitution. It strikes at the very foundation of our Constitution. It is capable of further dividing the citizens of this country. The politicians are good at using all sorts of means and sentiments to divide the citizens of this country. The interpretation being urged on us is their latest invention in that regard and unfortunately, they found a ready alliance in those who should know better. The Interpretation being urged on us is squarely against the letters and sprit of Our Constitution and it is hereby rejected.

    Based on the above and the fuller reasons lucidly explained in the lead judgment, I too dismiss the petition.

    Justice Moses Ugo

    I had earlier read in draft the Rulings and Judgments of my learned brother Haruna Simon Tsammani, J.C.A. in this Consolidated Petition Numbers CA/PEPC/03/2023, CA/PEPC/04/2023 and CA/PEPC/05/2023. I am in complete agreement with His Lordship’s reasoning and conclusions on all of them.

    First, for Petition No CA/PEPC/04/2023, I am of the very fixed view that the issues agitated by the petitioner therein concerning 3rd Respondent’s alleged disqualification for the 2023 Presidential election by reason of matters connected to and surrounding his running mate’s (4th Respondent’s) nomination and relinquishing of his earlier nomination by his party, the APC, for the Borno Central Senatorial District, having been settled on their merit by the Supreme Court in its judgment in Appeal No: SC7CV750172023. Peoples Democratic Party v. INEC & Ors in 3rd and 4th Respondent’s favour herein, with the apex court even holding that the said issues did not disqualify them, that decision constitutes issue estoppel.

    In short, the allegation of the petitioners that INEC shut down its IREV to manipulate votes for 2nd Respondent just does not add up for me. If anything, the probabilities arising from the results INEC declared nationwide as X-rayed above rather seem to me to eloquently support INEC’s position that its inability to upload the polling unit results real- time as earlier promised was not deliberate but caused by technical issues outside its control that afflicted its e-transmission system, which issues it claims made it impossible for its e-transmission system to map the uploaded polling units results for the Presidential election to any specific State.

    Read Also: PDP faults Tinubu’s legal team claim on PEPC judgment

    Justice Abba Mohammed

    I have read before now the draft of the lead judgment just delivered by my learned brother, HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, JCA in the three consolidated Petitions Nos. CA/PEPC/03/2023, CA/PEPC/04/2023 and CA/PEPC/05/2023. I am in agreement with and I adopt all the reasons and conclusions stated therein, both in respect of the rulings on the objections and the merits of the three consolidated Petitions.

    Having also found no merit in all three Petitions Nos. CA/PEPC/03/2023, CA/PEPC/04/2023 and CA/PEPC/05/2023, I join my learned brother Tsammani, JCA in dismissing all three Petitions. I abide by the consequential orders made in the lead judgment.

  • Sights and sounds of PEPC judgement

    Sights and sounds of PEPC judgement

    The about 12 hours it took to deliver the Presidential Election Petition Court’s decision on the suits filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Labour Party (LP), and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) against the victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the February 25 presidential election should rightly define the judgement’s fame. Instead, other sights and sounds of the September 6 judgement have seemed to dominate the airwaves. Among them were the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) warning strike of September 5 and 6, PDP chieftain Bode George’s preemptive verbal strike against the court verdict, ex-governor Kayode Fayemi’s belated epiphany on what constitutes electoral victory, and Justice Mary Peter-Odili’s controversial admonition against party supporters’ fanaticism.

    In the end, the APC’s Bola Tinubu won the case, retained the presidency, and cost the opposition over N80m awarded as costs against the three petitioners, Atiku Abubakar, a former vice president, Peter Obi, a former Anambra governor, and Chichi Ojei of the APM. The APM candidate called only one witness, the LP 13, and the PDP 27. How they believed with their few witnesses and incompetent arguments they could win their petitions left everybody dumbfounded. The justices breezed through the APM petition, dwelt substantially on the LP case, and finally landed with a thud on the PDP petition, this time, inured to time as it were, leaving petitioners, counsels and other busybodies soundly asleep. It was an uproarious time in court last Wednesday.

    Here are some of the sights and sounds. The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), whose brainchild the LP is, ordered a two-day warning strike ostensibly to ground the country in protest against the federal government’s dilly-dallying over how to meliorate the harshness of its economic policies on workers and the poor. In reality, however, and given the unholy connection between the union and the LP, the strike was widely seen as a ploy to indirectly pressure the justices into ordering election rerun. Not only was the strike poorly observed, especially with the less politicised Trade Union Congress (TUC) disavowing the subterranean tactic, it had little or no effect on both the country and the justices, who had by then become clearly incensed by the bullying and irritating tactics of a section of the political public.

    Read Also: PEPC: Judgment validates Tinubu’s earlier victory-Uzodinma

    As if by coordination, Bode George, a PDP chieftain and former military governor, also weighed in on the pre-judgement politics of the season. His dilatoriness had of course become legendary, given how he took oath to go into exile should the then APC presidential aspirant Bola Tinubu become the president, an oath he quickly and remorselessly abjured when it became inconvenient. His volubility had also become unquenchable, but perhaps now bettered only by Edo State governor Godwin Obaseki’s petulant and superficial contribution to national discourse. Last Monday, Chief George warned the election court justices not to declare any of the contestants to the presidency winner of the poll, but to instead order a rerun. It would be injustice to give victory to President Tinubu, he growled. What evidence did he give or speak to? None. He only spoke from his distant and intangible approximations, given his long-lasting animosity towards President Tinubu, and knowing full well that neither Alhaji Atiku nor Mr Obi could prove their cases.

    And there was the sound of fury of former Ekiti State governor, Dr Fayemi. Discarding his progressive credentials, ignoring constitutional provisions, and sneering at past relationship with the president, Dr Fayemi, a day before the PEPC read its judgement, began questioning the rationale of declaring a candidate who scored about 35 percent president. It was an indirect reference to President Tinubu who scored about 37 percent. The politics of the former Ekiti governor is actually not as complicated or amoral as many people think. It is far worse, and its rubric quite unsavoury. He will be numbered among opposition politicians in the foreseeable future if he is not accommodated in the administration. The wonder is not how he sometimes disavows his friends, helpers and mentors; the miracle is how he combines reactionary and progressive politics, and how incredibly he makes both look like progressivism.

    The vacillations of Pat Utomi, an LP chieftain, constituted another mesmerising sight and sound of the PEPC judgement. Shortly before the judgement was delivered, and in line with the inciting rhetoric he and the LP, together with many others around the country, had deployed to whip up hatred against Nigeria, Prof Utomi lied in a tweet that many politicians and judges were fleeing the country to avoid judgement day apocalypse. There was no iota of truth in the statement, but he made it anyway. His reputation, supposedly built over decades, was flimsy at best; now it has been demolished on the altar of LP and ethnic politics.

    Unfortunately, it was in the midst of the muckraking that preceded the PEPC judgement that Justice Odili made a harmless remark warning against ‘fanning the embers of hatred’ or trying to burn the country because of electoral setbacks. She had also advised that politicians refrain from ‘bringing the roof down’ over everybody. For this, she was pilloried in unprintable terms, and accused of directing her statements at LP and PDP candidates. It was clear that except one sounded like the dilatory Chief George or the Machiavellian Dr Fayemi in the service of delegitimising the presidential election, any other point of view was to be denounced. But regardless, the PEPC gave its judgement last Wednesday, affirmed the February poll, and damned the consequences. The heavens have not fallen, obviously.

  • Oyo women hail Tinubu on PEPC victory, make case for female minister 

    Oyo women hail Tinubu on PEPC victory, make case for female minister 

     A group, Renewed Hope Women and Youths in Oyo state on Friday, September 8, congratulated President Bola Tinubu on his victory at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

    The group also said that it appreciates the president for believing in women and youths.

    It said: ‘’We appreciate all the government policies so far and the president for believing in women and youths by appointing Betta Edu and Bosun Tijani as ministers in the Renewed Hope agenda.”

    The group also urged President Tinubu to pick the minister of youth affairs from the state. 

     According to them, Oyo state has one minister and in the past few years, no female minister has been chosen from the state.  

    The group further stated: ‘’Presently, women’s ministerial percentage is less than 19%, this is why we are appealing to the president that the Minister of Youth Affairs should come to a woman in South West and specifically Oyo state.

    Read Also: Bayelsa APC campaigners congratulate Tinubu on Tribunal victory

     “We, renewed hope women/ youths group in Oyo State (APC) wish to appeal to our president that, Oyo State women/youths contributed so much to the victory of the APC in the last election. We want your Excellency to believe that women know how to handle youth and young ones well.

    ‘’We want the Minister of Youth Affairs to come to Oyo state and for a young woman to handle the office. We believe with a woman as the minister of Youth Affairs for the first time, youths would be developed in their various skills and there would be Job creation for them. 

    “The Renewed Hope Women/ Youths Group in Oyo state recommend a young woman, an eloquent, diligent young mother, passionate woman who has contributed much to the development of women/youths in the person of Olaitan Victor. She has the skill and influence both at home and abroad to develop our youths.

    “Victor was an aspirant for House of Representative, Ibadan North constituency in 2022 on the party’s platform and Board Member WITSA (World Innovation, Technology android Service Alliance USA) etc.”

  • PEPC judgment: A triumph of truth, says AbdulRazaq

    PEPC judgment: A triumph of truth, says AbdulRazaq

    Gov. AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq of Kwara has congratulated President Bola Tinubu and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) on the unanimous decision of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) upholding the election of the President.

    This is contained in a statement issued in Ilorin on Thursday by the Chief Press Secretary to the governor, Mr Rafiu Ajakaye.

    He said the judgment attested to the credibility of the ballot and the fact that the outcome reflected the wishes of the largest majority of eligible voters.

    He also commended the PEPC for standing strictly with the constitution, and not succumbing to threats and intimidation anchored on fact-free claims of electoral malpractice.

    Read Also: AbdulRazaq’s legacy of inclusion in Kwara

    “In the final analysis, our democracy has been enriched and the right of Nigerians to freely elect leaders of their choice equally upheld as all issues were clinically examined and resolved in line with all relevant laws.

    “The judgment is a triumph of truth,” said the governor.

    AbdulRazaq said PEPC decision would strengthen the resolve of the president to continue to deliver on his campaign promises to the good people of Nigeria.

    “We promise to continue to work with Mr President and his great team in the task of building a stronger economy, a safer nation and a happier people,” he said. (NAN)

  • PEPC verdict: Save your resources, there’s no ground for appeal, Bello tells Atiku, Obi

    PEPC verdict: Save your resources, there’s no ground for appeal, Bello tells Atiku, Obi

    Kogi state governor, Yahaya Bello on Thursday, September 7, said appealing the verdict of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) would be needless, adding that there are no grounds for appeal.

    Governor Bello, who expressed the view while speaking to journalists at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, after a meeting with Vice President Kashim Shettima, advised opposition parties and their candidates to save their resources, saying there was no flaw with the court’s verdict.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party (LP), along with their presidential candidates, Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi respectively, had filed petitions against the election of President Bola Tinubu in the 2023 Presidential Election.

    The PEPC, however, on Wednesday, September 7, threw out the petitions, affirming President Tinubu’s victory at the election.

    Reacting to the court verdict when asked by journalists, Bello said the court had let the truth out in its verdict, admonishing the challengers to save their efforts as the judgement is unassailable.

    He said: “Nothing is as successful as success. We are happy; Nigerians are happy and the truth is out there. We appreciate all that happened yesterday. The truth has been exposed. Imagine the justices sitting down for almost fourteen hours to deliver those landmark judgements yesterday.

    Read Also: PEPC verdict: Save your resources, there’s no ground for appeal, Bello tells Atiku, Obi

    “Nigerians within the country and in the Diaspora are happy and I think it’s time to settle down and face governance and I advise all those that feel aggrieved, that we have only one country, Nigeria, they should all come together and support President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and ensure that we fix this country.

    “Whatever hardship we are facing today is the effects of the past. Definitely, we have Mr Fix It who is trying his best, travelling around the world to ensure that Nigeria is fixed. So we are happy the matter is settled.

    “As far as I’m concerned, I don’t think there is any ground for appeal. I will rather appeal to them that they should drop any appeal, go to the higher court and then save the resources, save the trouble, advise their supporters, and admonish them that they should accept yesterday’s judgement. No flaw. I thank God for all that happened yesterday”, the governor advised.

    Reacting to the loss of two senatorial seats by the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in Kogi state at the tribunal, Governor Bello expressed optimism that the party would reclaim the seats through lawful means, saying it would be three senatorial seats for the party in the state at last.

    The tribunal had previously invalidated the election results in 94 polling units, leading to a rerun in Kogi East, where the APC’s senator, Jibrin Isah, was removed. Additionally, the tribunal declared PDP’s Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan as the victor in the Kogi Central Senatorial election.

    “This is democracy and they have the right of appeal. I think they will take the appropriate steps to ensure that no violence is orchestrated anywhere. We will follow the due process of the law and whatever will be the outcome at the end of the day, we’ll abide by it.

    “But I want to assure you that even judging from the pronouncements yesterday at the appeal court, we are going to have our 3/3 Senate in Kogi state, I can assure you.”

  • Akpabio lauds PEPC’s verdict on 2023 presidential polls

    Akpabio lauds PEPC’s verdict on 2023 presidential polls

    The Senate president, Godswill Akpabio has lauded the judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), which on Wednesday, September 6, affirmed the victory of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima in the 2023 presidential election.

    Akpabio described the court’s verdict as an affirmation of the popular mandate of the Nigerian people for the Tinubu/Shettima ticket of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as delivered at the polls in February.

    The senate president in a statement by his media unit heartily congratulated Tinubu and Shettima on the resounding affirmation of their popular mandate by the well-thought-out judgement of the court.

    Akpabio noted that the court painstakingly evaluated all the issues raised by the petitioners and delivered a clear verdict on the integrity of Nigeria’s electoral process.

    He asserted that it is clear to see by dispassionate observers that despite the challenges, Nigeria’s electoral process is making steady progress and deserves the appreciation and support of all Nigerians and friends of Nigeria.

    Read Also: Atiku’s greed caused PDP’s defeat at PEPC – VON DG

    Akpabio urged Nigerians to continue to support Tinubu’s government in its drive to deliver the Renewed Hope Agenda of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

    He said: “I applaud the judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal for upholding the victory of our President, His Excellency, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and our Vice President, His Excellency, Kashim Shettima, at the 2023 presidential polls.

    “I also congratulate our great party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), on its vindication by this well-thought-out landmark judgement.

    “This judgement has expressly affirmed the popular mandate of the Nigerian people for our party the APC and its Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, freely given at the February 2023 polls.

    “As the Court has painstakingly addressed all the issues raised by the petitioners, I urge all concerned to accept the judgement and join hands with the Tinubu government in its bold efforts to secure the wellbeing of our people.”

  • PEPC judgement based on facts not sentiments – APC chieftain

    PEPC judgement based on facts not sentiments – APC chieftain

    Mr Jesutega Onokpasa a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) says Wednesday’s judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) is based on facts and not sentiments.

    Onokpasa, also a lawyer, said this at a virtual news conference on Thursday in Abuja, saying that the petitioners sought legal redress to President Bola Tinubu’s election victory based on sentiments and not facts.

    “The entire court process was a waste of time; the petitioners wasted our time as Nigerians, wasted the court’s time and the lawyers’ time.

    “Lawyers should learn from this case not to waste their time by taking up cases without having the proof to back their petitions.

    “The petitioners were an indictment of the professional rascality of some lawyers to bring cases without the ability to prove their claims or petitions.

    “The position of the law is not sentimental but factual,” he said.

    Onokpasa, a member of the dissolved APC Presidential Campaign Council said that many people tried to undermine and intimidate the judiciary at the PEPC, but failed.

    He said that the ruling on 25 per cent votes in Abuja which was quite contentious had  made the FCT equal to other states.

    Read Also: Why PEPC dismissed APM’s petition against Tinubu, Shettma

    ‘’The contentious 25 per cent votes in Abuja was trying to make some citizens more citizens than others.

    “There are many states that contributes more to the revenue of the country that the FCT, so why should the people in Abuja think that they can decide or be the deciding factor of an election by over 200 million people.

    “Are we going to create first class and second class citizens in our country when according to law all of us are equal in the country and nobody has veto power over anyone else and our lordship have upheld that.

    “The petitioners have completed presented a bizarre petition and a frolic in professionalism this case,” he said.

    (NAN)

  • Atiku’s greed caused PDP’s defeat at PEPC – VON DG

    Atiku’s greed caused PDP’s defeat at PEPC – VON DG

    Mr Osita Okechukwu, the Director-General of the Voice of Nigeria (VON) says he fully understands the grief of the opposition parties over the judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

    Okechukwu, also a foundation member of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) said this when he spoke with journalists in Abuja.

    He said that although the main opposition PDP had bright chances of bouncing back through the 2023 presidential election, the political greed of the party’s candidate, former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, denied the party victory.

    Okechukwu said that Atiku’s failure to rise to the golden opportunity and play as a statesman by throwing support for his erstwhile running mate Peter Obi or any other Southern presidential candidate divided the opposition party.

    “Atiku dealt PDP a huge blow from which it might be difficult to recover.”

    He dismissed claims that the petitioners had maintained that President Bola Tinubu was not qualified to run and allegations of irregularities in the conduct of the election as well as the failure to electronically transmit results in real time were fatal to the respondents’ case.

    “Those intricate webs could have been resolved if Atiku had obeyed the zoning convention, supported Peter Obi or any other Southern presidential candidate it could been simply an all southern bout.

    “The Wike Masquerade couldn’t have emerged. That would have meant that the bulk of votes he garnered could have been credited to PDP.

    “Atiku divided PDP’s votes irreparably, all the votes Labour Party garnered were from the party’s stronghold, minus voted warehoused by the former Vice President who naively forgot that northern voters are one of the most sophisticated in the country, but believed that northern electorate would behave like children in a dormitory waiting for directives on how to vote,” he said.

    Okechukwu said that Tinubu deserved accolades for rescuing the zoning convention which guarantees equity, and natural justice between the north and south.

    “First and foremost, let me congratulate Tinubu, for rescuing the zoning convention, a ligament binding north and south from unprecedented assault.

    “To be honest, my take is that the opposition lost the election that day in 2022, when Atiku Abubakar trampled on the presidential zoning convention, which governed the 4th Republic Nigeria and was also embedded in his party’s Constitution.

    “Recall that Atiku earned accolades when he stormed out of PDP Convention in 2014 in protest that President Goodluck Jonathan was breaching the zoning convention. And, in 2018, Governor Nyesom Wike hosted PDP Convention in Port Harcourt and ensured that only northern presidential aspirants contested for the presidential ticket as a way of honouring the zoning convention.

    “So, it is obvious that when Atiku sacrificed statesmanship on the altar of narrow political ambition, one concluded that he had wittingly or unwittingly fatally wounded the fabric of PDP. And, going by the time worn cliché, a divided house cannot stand, Nigerians should recognise that Atiku by his greed denied PDP a possible victory.”

    On the way forward, the APC chieftain suggested the promulgation of a revised Electoral Act that will resolve all evident ambiguities, by enthroning mandatorily only electronic accreditation and transmission of results.

    “I subscribe to the idea that we should totally abolish manual collation of results and make electronic transmission of results mandatory. We also need to return to the popular Justice Uwais Handbook on Electoral Reform, which among other fine democratic tenets recommended how best to transparently recruit the INEC Chairman, Commissioners and sundry officials.

    “With these altercations, Election Petitions will definitely be concluded before swearing-in of winners. Let us not forget that our democracy has witnessed tremendous advancement and keep in mind the fact that democracy is not a revolution, but a work in progress,” Okechukwu said.

    (NAN)

  • Why PEPC dismissed APM’s petition against Tinubu, Shettma

    Why PEPC dismissed APM’s petition against Tinubu, Shettma

    The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC)  yesterday dismissed the petition by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) challenging the outcome of the last presidential election for lacking in merit

    The PEPC held that the petitioner failed to prove the sole ground of the petition, which was that President Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettma were not qualified to have contested the election on the ground that Shettima allegedly had double nominations.

    In a lead judgment read by the Chairman of the five-member panel, Justice Haruna Tsammani, the court held that the issue about whether or not Shettma had double nomination was effectively resolved by the Supreme Court in an earlier judgment in the case brought against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    The court held that there was no evidence that Shettima had double nominations as there were evidence that he effectively resigned his earlier nomination as the APC’s candidate for Borno Central Senatorial District before accepting nomination as vice presidential candidate.

    Read Also: Lagos, Borno, three others ranked top food, nutrition-insecure states

    It further held that while the constitution allows a presidential candidate to choose whoever he/she likes as a running mate, a fresh primary was not required where a vice presidential candidate withdraws his candidacy as was the case with Kabir Masari.

    In an earlier ruling, the court struck out the petition by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) after upholding the preliminary objections raised against the competence of the petition by the respondents – the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the All Progressives Congress (APC),  Tinubu, Shettma and Kabir Masari.

    The court held that nomination, which is a pre-election matter, is outside the scope of the tribunal’s jurisdiction.

    It also held that the issue ought to have been raised before the Federal High Court, adding that even if the PEPC was to assume jurisdiction and hear the petition, the case was statute barred, being a pre-election matter.

    The court also held that the petitioner lacked the locus standi to have brought the petition, because the law did not allow a political party to query the process adopted by another political party in nominating its candidate.

    It also held that invalid nomination or double nominations did not qualify as a ground for disqualification in respect of the presidential election as provided in Sections 131 and 137 of the constitution.

    On whether Masari’s replacement invalidated Tinubu’s candidacy, the court held that Masari, who was nominated as placeholder by the APC for the position of the Vice President, was not a necessary party to the petition because he was neither a candidate nor did he win election.

    The court also found that Masari was not a necessary party to the petition and ought not to have been made a party, because no claim was raised against him by the petitioner.