TheNewsGuru

Tag: Supreme Court

  • BREAKING: APC, PDP, LP National Chairmen arrive at Supreme Court

    BREAKING: APC, PDP, LP National Chairmen arrive at Supreme Court

    National Chairmen of the All Progressives Congress (APC), People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party have arrived at the premises of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports the Supreme Court is scheduled to deliver judgement today in the appeals filed by the presidential candidates of the PDP, Alhaji Abubakar Atiku and Labour Party, Mr Peter Obi.

    The party chairmen were seen exchanging pleasantries as they arrived at the Supreme Court premises.

    Atiku and Obi are challenging the judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), which dismissed their election petitions challenging the outcome of the February 25 presidential election and affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.

    Chief of Staff of President Tinubu, Femi Gbajabiamila and the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu are also among the dignitaries confirmed at the Supreme Court in Abuja for the final judgement on the 2023 presidential election.

     

    Details shortly…

  • See Supreme Court Justices to decide Tinubu, Atiku, Obi’s fate today

    See Supreme Court Justices to decide Tinubu, Atiku, Obi’s fate today

    The Supreme Court of Nigeria is set to deliver judgement Today (Thursday) in the appeals filed by the presidential candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Abubakar Atiku and Labour Party, Mr Peter Obi.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports a seven-man panel of Justices led by Justice Inyang Okoro will determine the appeal, as confirmed by the Director of Information of the Supreme Court, Mr Festus Akande.

    Other Justices on the panel are Justice Uwani Abaji, Justice Lawal Garba, Justice Ibrahim Saulawa, Justice Adamu Jauro, Justice Tijani Abubakar, and Justice Emma Agim.

    Atiku and Obi are challenging the judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), which dismissed their election petitions challenging the outcome of the Feb. 25 presidential election and affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.

    Earlier, the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal filed by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) challenging the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) which affirmed Tinubu’s victory.

    TNG reports the apex court had on Monday, reserved judgement after hearing the appeals of Obi and Atiku challenging the judgment of the PEPC that affirmed President Tinubu’s victory.

    Recall the PEPC on Sept. 6 dismissed Atiku and Obi’s petitions for lacking in merit and affirmed the election of Tinubu.

    Miffed by the judgement, the duo approached the Supreme Court asking it to overturn the judgment of the lower court in their favour.

    In Atiku’s notice of appeal predicated on 35 grounds, he told the apex court that the PEPC erred on the side of law in the judgement delivered by the Chairman of the panel, Justice Haruna Tsammani.

    Atiku, through his lead counsel, Mr Chris Uche, SAN told the court that the judgment of the PEPC was a miscarriage of justice.

    He argued that the lower court also erred in law when it failed to nullify the presidential election held on Feb. 25, on the grounds of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022.

    According to him, by the evidence before the court, INEC conducted the election based on grave and gross misrepresentation contrary to the principles of the Electoral Act 2022, based on the doctrine of legitimate expectation.

    Specifically, Atiku asked the Supreme Court to set aside the whole findings and conclusions of the PEPC on the grounds that they did not represent the true picture of the grounds of his petition.

    Obi, on the other hand through his lead counsel Mr Levi Uzoukwu, SAN also prayed the apex court to set aside the judgement of the PEPC that dismissed his petition.

    Uzoukwu prayed the court to allow the appeal of his client and grant all the prayers sought.

    In their responses,  counsel to the respondents, the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC), President Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress, (APC) each urged the court to dismiss the appeals for want of merit and for being frivolous.

    Specifically, President Tinubu’s lawyer, Mr Wole Olanipekun, SAN described the appeals as lacking in merit .

    Olanipekun specifically told the court that the appeal filed by Atiku was abusive in nature and asked the court to dismiss the appeal.

    Mr Mahmoud Yakubu, SAN for INEC and Mr Akin Olujimi similarly asked the panel to dismiss the appeals for want of merit.

    TNG reports that although Atiku and Obi’s petitions were consolidated, they were heard separately.

  • BREAKING: Supreme Court dismisses APM’s appeal against Tinubu

    BREAKING: Supreme Court dismisses APM’s appeal against Tinubu

    The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the appeal filed by the Allied Peoples Movement, (APM) challenging the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) which affirmed President Bola Tinubu’s victory.

    Justice Inyang Okoro, leading six other justices of the apex court dismissed the appeal saying that hearing it would amount to “a waste of the precious time of the court’’.

    The APM had in the appeal prayed the court to hold that the PEPC misconceived the material facts before it, when it struck out its undefended petition against Tinubu’s victory.

    The party asked the court to hold that the withdrawal of Kabiru Masari from the race, by operation of law, amounted to automatic withdrawal and invalidation of the candidature of Tinubu as the presidential candidate of the APC.

    It would be recalled that Masari was named the running mate of Tinubu before he was replaced by Vice President Kashim Shetima

    The APM said in its brief of argument by its counsel, Mr Chukwuma-Machukwu-Ume, SAN, that the PEPC wrongly struck out its petition.

    The party prayed the court to set aside the decision of the lower court as being misconceived.

    APM also argued that the striking out of Masari’s name from its petition and its consequent dismissal on Sept. 6 was in error, as Masari was a necessary party in the petition.

    The PEPC had dismissed APM’s petition based on pre- hearing motions filed by INEC, APC and Shettima.

    According to the APM, the grounds upon which its petition was predicated was that Tinubu was at the time of the presidential election, not qualified to contest in line with Section 134(1)(a) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

    Machukwu-Ume told the court that the PEPC misconceived the material facts and case of his client and wrongly progressed to determine issues not contemplated by the appellant’s petition and erroneously dismissed the petition.

    However, efforts by Machukwu- Ume to move the appeal were rejected by the panel on the grounds that moving it would amount to wasting the precious time of the court.

    Justice Inyang Okoro, the presiding justice insisted that the appeal be withdrawn since the issue had been decided.

    “We have read your appeal and the issues raised therein.

    “You are not asking us to make your candidate the president if your appeal succeeds.

    “You just want to state the law and go home, without benefit. We have other appeals that are substantial and withdrawing this appeal will help reduce the workload on us.

    “We have read the appeal and are unanimous that it is a non-issue, having been pronounced upon by this court,’’ Justice Okoro said.

    Machukwu-Ume , though reluctantly,  accepted  and withdrew the appeal on behalf of his client, the APM.

    All the respondents did not oppose to the withdrawal and did not ask for cost.

    The seven-member panel consequently dismissed the appeal after it was withdrawn by the appellant.

  • BREAKING: Supreme Court reserves judgement in Atiku, Obi’s appeals against Tinubu

    BREAKING: Supreme Court reserves judgement in Atiku, Obi’s appeals against Tinubu

    The Supreme Court has reserved judgment in the appeal filed by the Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) in the Feb. 25, election, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, seeking to dismiss and set aside the  judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

    The court similarly reserved judgment in the appeal filed by the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Mr Peter Obi also challenging the election of President Bola Tinubu.

    Recall that the PEPC on Sept. 6, dismissed Atiku and Obi’s petitions for lacking in merit and affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.

    The seven-man panel of justices led by Justice Inyang Okoro, after hearing both appeals on Monday in Abuja, said the date for judgment would be communicated to the parties.

    Other justices on the panel are Justice Uwani Abaji, Justice Lawal Garba, Justice Ibrahim Saulawa, Justice Adamu Jauro, Justice Tijani Abubakar, and Justice Emma Agim.

    In Atiku’s notice of appeal predicated on 35 grounds, he told the apex court that the PEPC erred on the side of law in the judgment delivered by the Chairman of the panel,  Justice Haruna Tsammani.

    Atiku, through his lead counsel, Mr Chris Uche, SAN told the court that the judgment of the PEPC was a miscarriage of justice.

    He argued that the lower court also erred in law when it failed to nullify the presidential election held on Feb. 25, on the grounds of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022.

    According to him, by the evidence before the court, INEC conducted the election based on grave and gross misrepresentation contrary to the principles of the Electoral Act 2022, based on the doctrine of legitimate expectation.

    Specifically, Atiku asked the Supreme Court to set aside the whole findings and conclusions of the PEPC on the grounds that they did not represent the true picture of the grounds of his petition.

    Obi, on the other hand through his lead counsel Mr Levi Uzoukwu, SAN also prayed the apex court to set aside the judgment of the PEPC that dismissed his petition.

    Uzoukwu prayed the court to allow the appeal of his client and grant all the prayers sought.

    In their responses,  counsel to the respondents, the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC), President Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress, (APC) each urged the court to dismiss the appeals for want of merit and for being frivolous.

    Specifically, President Tinubu’s lawyer, Mr Wole Olanipekun, SAN described the appeals as lacking in merit.

    Olanipekun specifically told the court that the appeal filed by Atiku was abusive in nature and asked the court to dismiss the appeal.

    Mr Mahmoud Yakubu, SAN for INEC and Mr Akin Olujimi similarly asked the panel to dismiss the appeals for want of merit.

    Atiku and Obi are before the apex court challenging Sept. 6  judgment of the PEPC which dismissed their petitions challenging the victory of President Bola Tinubu at the Feb. 25 presidential polls.

    Although both petitions were consolidated, they were heard separately.

  • What Atiku, Peter Obi told Supreme Court about PEPC’s judgement

    What Atiku, Peter Obi told Supreme Court about PEPC’s judgement

    The Supreme Court of Nigeria began hearing today the appeals filed by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate in the February 25 presidential election, Alhaji Abubakar Atiku.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports the Supreme Court will also hear the petitions filed by the Labour Party and it’s presidential candidate, Mr Peter Obi as well as that of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), all challenging the judgement of the 2023 Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC).

    Atiku and the PDP; Obi and the Labour Party and APM are before the apex court challenging the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court, (PEPC) which affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.

    Justice Inyang Okorowo is leading six other justices of the Supreme Court to hear the appeal. Other justices on the seven-man panel are Justice Uwani Abaji, Justice Lawal Garba, Justice Ibrahim Saulawa, Justice Adamu Jauro, Justice Tijani Abubakar, and Justice Emma Agim.

    TNG reports that the National Security Adviser, (NSA) Mr Nuhu Ribadu, the Chief of Staff to the president Mr Femi Gbajabiamila and the All Progressives Congress, (APC) Chairman, Mr Abdullahi Ganduje are among  dignitories present in court to witness the proceedings.

    In court filings at the Supreme Court, Mr Chris Uche, Atiku’s counsel contended that the PEPC’s judgment occasioned “grave error and miscarriage of justice” in its legal reasoning by upholding Mr Tinubu’s election as president.

    In the document dated Sept. 18, Uche contended that the presidential election court failed to adequately evaluate his client’s evidence before reaching its conclusions.

    He further contended, among other issues, that the presidential election court erred in law when it “failed to nullify the presidential election held on Feb. 25 on the grounds of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, when by evidence before the tribunal, INEC conducted the election based on grave and gross misrepresentation contrary to the principles of the Electoral Act 2022, based on the “doctrine of legitimate expectation.”

    In Obi’s appeal at the Supreme Court, his lawyer, Livy Uzoukwu, filed 51 grounds in challenging the presidential election court’s judgment.

    Uzoukwu, a SAN, argued that PEPC reached the wrong conclusions.

    In one of the grounds, Mr Uzoukwu told the Supreme Court that the five-member panel of the Presidential Election Petition Court led by Haruna Tsammani “erred in law and thereby reached a wrong conclusion” when it dismissed Mr Obi’s suit.

    He faulted the presidential election court’s evaluation of Mr Obi’s evidence. He said the court erroneously ruled that Obi’s case failed to establish the polling stations where electoral malpractices took place during the February presidential election.

    The lawyer also said the lower court’s conclusions caused a “grave miscarriage of justice” when it held that Obi did not identify the specific number of votes he polled at polling units where he accused INEC and Tinubu of suppression of votes.

    In its appeal at Supreme Supreme, APM’s lawyer, Chukwuma–Machukwu–Ume, a SAN, predicated his client’s suit on 10 grounds.

    Machukwu-Ume, a SAN, prayed the apex court to nullify the presidential election court verdict for its numerous errors in law.

    He argued that sections 131 and 142 (1) of the 1991 Constitution are inextricably linked and neither can be confined as a pre-election matter, as these qualifications are conditions precedent to, for being elected into the office of President.

  • Supreme Court hears Atiku’s motion to bring new evidence against Tinubu

    Supreme Court hears Atiku’s motion to bring new evidence against Tinubu

    Justice Inyang Okoro is leading six other justices of the Supreme Court to hear the motion filed by the  Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) in the Feb. 25, presidential election, Alhaji Abubakar Atiku seeking leave to file fresh evidence against President Bola Tinubu.

    Other justices on the seven-man panel are Justice Uwani Abaji, Justice Lawal Garba, Justice Ibrahim Saulawa, Justice Adamu Jauro, Justice Tijani Abubakar, and Justice Emma Agim.

    Atiku and the PDP are seeking an order granting them leave to produce and for the court to receive fresh and additional evidence by way of deposition on oath from the Chicago State University.

    This is for use in this appeal to wit: the certified discovery deposition made by Caleb Westberg on behalf of Chicago State University on Oct. 3,  disclaiming the certificate presented by President Bola  Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC).

    At Monday’s sitting, counsel to the appellants was Mr  Chris Uche, SAN, Mr Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN appeared  for INEC, who is the  1st respondent.

    Mr Wole Olanipekun SAN, announced appearance for  President  Tinubu, the second respondent  while Mr Akin Olujimi SAN,  represented  the All Progressives Congress, (APC), the  3rd respondent.

    Uche told the apex court that his client was seeking leave to file new evidence in support of his case.

    “By the motion seeking permission dated Oct.5 and filed on Oct. 6, we are praying for an order of leave to present fresh evidence on appeal pursuant to the powers of the Supreme Court, particularly the depositions on oath from the Chicago State University,” Uche said.

    Uche further  told the panel that Tinubu, APC and INEC were opposing the application essentially on technical grounds of the the evidence  not being pleaded and coming late.

    He  argued that the motion was akin to jurisdictional issue not minding when it was filed, adding that the apex court should side-step technicalities and grant the request.

    Atiku’s counsel held that the motion was a constitutional issue, adding that the issue of 180 days could  not tie the hands of the apex court as they could hear the motion.

    Responding,  INEC’s lawyer said Section 285 of the 1999 Constitution should be interpreted to accommodate the Court of Appeal as a Tribunal.

    For his part, Olanipekun asked the court to dismiss what he described as an “unusual application” for lacking in merit.

    Olanipekun argued that  the Court of Appeal was a Tribunal based on relevant constitutional provisions, adding that the 180 days was like a rock of Gibraltar and it could not  be moved as it was sacrosanct.

    For his part, counsel  to the APC, asked the court to reject the motion seeking leave to bring additional fresh evidence as it was alien in law.

    The News Agency of Nigeria, (NAN) reports that Atiku is before the court  challenging the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court, (PEPC) which affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.

    The  the Labour Party and it’s presidential candidate, Mr Peter Obi as well  the Allied Peoples Movement, (APM) are also challenging the judgment of the PEPC before the apex court.

    NAN also reports that although the three petition were consolidated, the appeals would be heard separately.

  • Ribadu, Gbajabiamila present as Supreme Court begins hearing Atiku, Obi appeals

    Ribadu, Gbajabiamila present as Supreme Court begins hearing Atiku, Obi appeals

    Supreme Court is set to hear the appeals filed by the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP), its presidential candidate in the Feb. 25 presidential election, Alhaji Abubakar Atiku.

    Atiku is before the court challenging the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court, (PEPC) which affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.

    The apex court will also hear the petitions filed by the Labour Party and it’s presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi as well as that of the Allied Peoples Movement, (APM) all challenging the judgment of the PEPC.

    The panel of Justices hearing the appeals is headed by Justice Inyang Okorowo.

    The National Security Adviser, (NSA) Mr Nuhu Ribadu, the Chief of Staff to the president Mr Femi Gbajabiamila, and the All Progressives Congress, (APC) Chairman, Mr Abdullahi Ganduje are among  dignitories present in court to witness the proceedings.

  • PDP confident in Supreme Court for election appeal

    PDP confident in Supreme Court for election appeal

    The Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) has expressed confidence in the Supreme Court to deliver justice as it commences the hearing of the 2023 Presidential Election Appeal today.
    In a press statement, the National Publicity Secretary of the party, Debo Ologunagba, conveyed the party’s belief that the issues surrounding the February 2023 Presidential election will be granted a fair hearing through the Supreme Court.
    “Nigerians and indeed the whole world look forward to the Supreme Court for justice in the hope that the Court will apply the laws, including the express provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), the Electoral Act, 2022 and INEC Guidelines and Regulations in delivering substantial justice in the matter.
    “Nigerians are therefore optimistic in hoping that the Supreme Court will dispense substantial Justice according to law and fact in the Appeal,” the PDP spokesperson said.
    Ologunagba further expressed hope that the Supreme Court will use the PDP’s case to reaffirm the principle that the Judiciary is the ultimate refuge for the common man.

  • Atiku, Obi, Tinubu’s Supreme Court battle begins today

    Atiku, Obi, Tinubu’s Supreme Court battle begins today

    Today, a seven-member panel of the Supreme Court is set to hear the appeals lodged by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, challenging the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court that upheld President Bola Tinubu’s election.

    Members of this panel, though yet to be identified, will scrutinize the appeals from Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi of the Labour Party, and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), all contesting the election victory of President Tinubu from the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    The Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja, presided over by Haruna Tsammani, had previously ruled against Atiku and Peter Obi, asserting that they failed to substantiate their claims of widespread electoral irregularities during the February 25 presidential election, conducted by Nigeria’s electoral commission, INEC. In a similar vein, the court dismissed another petition by the APM, deeming it without merit.

    Atiku, Peter Obi, and the APM subsequently filed separate appeals to challenge the court’s decisions.

    These appeals touch on several issues, including President Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima’s eligibility, the allegation that President Tinubu failed to secure 25 per cent of valid votes in Abuja, INEC’s alleged failure to electronically transmit polling unit results in real-time, and allegations of vote manipulation in President Tinubu’s favor.

    Another point of contention before the Supreme Court’s seven-member panel is the authenticity of President Tinubu’s academic records, which were obtained from Chicago State University (CSU) in October by Atiku.
    Atiku has already submitted the President’s educational records to the court, urging a thorough examination of their authenticity.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Wole Olanipekun, who is representing President Tinubu, has asserted that Atiku and Peter Obi’s appeals lack substance.

    This hearing at the Supreme Court draws considerable public interest, as witnessed during the earlier case at the Court of Appeal.

    Atiku has said his decision to pursue the legal route stems from his commitment to upholding the principles of democracy, transparency, and fair hearings.

    “The last presidential election in our country and the way it was managed by the electoral umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), leaves behind unenviable precedents, which I believe the courts have a duty to redress.

    “Our gains in ensuring transparent elections through the deployment of technology was heavily compromised by INEC in the way it managed the last presidential election, and I am afraid that the judgement of the court, as rendered by the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal yesterday, failed to restore confidence in our dreams of free and fair elections devoid of human manipulations.”

    “I refuse to accept the tribunal judgment because I believe that it is bereft of substantial justice. However, the disappointment in the verdict of the court can never destroy my confidence in the judiciary,” Atiku said.

  • BREAKING: Supreme Court justices drop to 10 as Muhammad bows out of service

    BREAKING: Supreme Court justices drop to 10 as Muhammad bows out of service

    The number of Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria has dropped to 10 following the retirement of Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports Muhammad, who joined the bench of the Supreme Court over a decade ago, retires on 27 October, further reducing the number of Justices of the Supreme Court.

    Recall the number of judges in the Supreme Court reduced from 20 to 14 in June 2022 when Justice Tanko Muhammad, former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), abruptly resigned.

    According to a statement by the Director of Information of the Supreme Court, Dr Festus Akande, a valedictory court session will hold for Muhammad on Friday.

    TNG learnt the valedictory court session will be held at the main courtroom of the Supreme Court of Nigeria at 10.00 am.

    “The special court session is to be presided over by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon. Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, who will customarily, pay tribute to Justice Musa Dattijo alongside other major stakeholders in the nation’s justice sector.

    “Justice Musa Dattijo hails from Chanchaga Local Government Area of Niger State,” the statement reads.

    Akande further stated that the jurist was born on Tuesday, October 27, 1953, in Minna, Niger State.

    “He attended Native Primary School, Minna from 1960 to 1966 for his First School Leaving Certificate.

    “Between 1967 and 1971, he was at Sheikh Sabbah College (now Sardauna Memorial Secondary School), Kaduna, from where he proceeded to Abdullahi Bayero College, Kano for a Pre-Degree programme which aided his immediate admission into the Faculty of Law at the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria where he bagged a degree in Law in 1977.

    “He was called to the Nigerian Bar on 2nd July, 1977. Not satisfied with only a first Degree in Law, Justice Dattijo sought for admission at Warwick University in 1982 for an LLM Degree which he obtained in 1983.

    “He took the oath of office as Justice of the Supreme Court on Tuesday, 10th July, 2012. His ascension to the Court of Appeal was more of a reward for hard work, inherent passion for his chosen profession, dedication to duty, and above all, a resolute application of the law in its true letters and words to all cases that came to him.

    “He earned a well-deserved elevation to the Court of Appeal on November 21,1998 from the Niger State Judiciary, and served meritoriously at different Divisions,” the statement further reads.

    TNG reports Muhammad is the second most senior judge on the court’s bench.