TheNewsGuru

Tag: Tribunal

  • Election Tribunal: Peter Obi, Labour Party’s petition vague – INEC

    Election Tribunal: Peter Obi, Labour Party’s petition vague – INEC

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has asked the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) to dismiss a petition filed by Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, saying the reliefs sought are not grantable.

    INEC, the 1st respondent, stated this in its reply filed on Monday night at the PEPC’s Secretariat by its lawyer, Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, in Abuja.

    The commission prayed the court to either “dismiss or strike out the petition for being grossly incompetent, abusive, vague, nebulous, generic, general, non-specific, ambiguous, equivocal, hypothetical and academic.”

    Mr Obi, the 1st petitioner, and LP, the 2nd petitioner, had sued INEC, Sen. Bola Tinubu, Sen. Kashim Shettima and All Progressives Congress (APC) as 1st to 4th respondents respectively.

    The petitioners are seeking the nullification of the election victory of Tinubu and Shettima in the Feb  25 presidential poll.

    Tinubu, who defeated 17 other candidates who took part in the election, scored a total of 8,794,726 votes, the highest of all the candidates.

    While former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) came second with  6,984,520 votes in the poll; Obi came third with 6,101,533 votes.

    Abubakar and PDP are also challenging the outcome of the poll in a separate petition.

    However, in the petition marked: CA/PEPC/03/2023 filed by Obi and LP’s lead counsel, Livy Ozoukwu, they contended that Tinubu “was not duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the time of the election.”

    The petitioners claimed there was rigging in 11 states, adding that they would demonstrate this in the declaration of results based on the uploaded results.

    They said INEC violated its own regulations when it announced the result despite the fact that at the time of the announcement, the totality of the polling unit results had yet to be fully scanned, uploaded and transmitted electronically as required by the Electoral Act, among others.

    In its notice of preliminary objection, INEC argued that the grounds on which the petition was based were defective, having regard to the vague and imprecise averments supporting the said grounds.

    It said that the ground of the petitioners bordering on non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022 and corrupt practices did not disclose a reasonable cause of action for failure to plead specific particulars and figures as to how the alleged non-compliance complained of substantially affected the results of the election.

    It said in view of the above argument, “Prayers 3, 5(i) and 5(11) of the petition predicated on the ground of non-compliance in Paragraph 20(11) of the petition are ungrantable.”

    It further said that the ground of the petition that Tinubu was not elected by majority of lawful votes cast as contained in Paragraph 20(iii) of the petition was defective for failure to plead the alleged unlawful votes to be deducted and/or lawful votes to be credited to the petitioners.

    INEC argued that the petitioners’ prayer to declare that Obi scored majority of lawful votes cast at the election and be declared winner was defective for failure to join necessary parties and for lack of requisite particulars and pleading to support same.

    The commission said that though Obi was a candidate at the election, it however disagreed that  denies that he has a right to be returned as elected, “not having polled majority of the lawful votes cast at the election and /or secured one quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all states in the federation and the FCT.”

    The commission said all political parties intending to sponsor candidates in the election were required to submit lists of their agents and they were expected to observe the election process at their units, sign and collect result sheets on behalf of their political parties at the close of polls.

    It argued that some of the political party agents whose names were on the list submitted to it were however absent at their polling units while some others who were present neglected to participate in the election process.

    According to INEC, the petitioners (Obi and LP) did not have polling agents in all the polling units across Nigeria as they only submitted a list of 134, 874 polling agents which is 41, 972 short of the 176, 846 polling units across Nigeria.

    It disagreed with the petitioners, insisting that they were not represented in many or some of the polling units in the country.

    The commission argued that while Shettima, the vice president-elect, was duly nominated and sponsored to contest the election, it also said that Tinubu and Shettima were duly declared and returned as elected and issued Certificates of Return having fulfilled the requirements of the constitution to be declared winners and returned.

  • Lagos guber: PDP asks tribunal to disqualify APC, Labour Party

    Lagos guber: PDP asks tribunal to disqualify APC, Labour Party

    The  Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Lagos State and its Governorship Candidate, Dr Abdul-Azeez Adediran (Jandor) have submitted a petition before the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal of Lagos State.

    The party and Adediran are calling for the disqualification of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Labour Party (LP) candidates in the election for non-compliance with the Electoral Act 2022.

    In the petition marked EPT/LAG/GOV/01/2023 dated April 7, the petitioners challenged the outcome of the March 18 governorship election on grounds of substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Law as well as the guidelines of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    While INEC is the 1st respondent, Gov. Babajide Sanwo-Olu; his Deputy Governorship candidate, Dr Obafemi Hamzat; the All Progressive Congress (APC), the Labour Party Governorship Candidate, Mr Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour and the Labour Party respectively are the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th respondents.

    Besides non-compliance with relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2022, Adediran and PDP in their petition are claiming that at the time of the governorship election held on March 18, 2023, Sanwo-Olu, Hamzat, and Rhodes-Vivour were not qualified to contest the election.

    The petitioners, therefore, prayed that all votes cast for them in the election be declared wasted.

    “The 2nd and 3rd Respondents, although not duly sponsored and not qualified, contested along with the 1st Petitioner and others for the office of Governor of Lagos State, the subject matter of this Petition.

    “Similarly, the 5th and 6th Respondents, although not duly sponsored and not qualified, contested along with the 1th Petitioner and others for the office of Governor of Lagos State, the subject matter of this Petition.

    “The 1st Respondent, upon the conclusion of the Election, declared the 2nd Respondent who was not properly sponsored by the 4th Respondent as the winner of the Election to the office of Governor of Lagos State.

    “The 5th Respondent who was similarly not properly sponsored by the 6th Respondent, was declared by the 1th Respondent as having scored the second highest number of votes at the Election to the office of Governor of Lagos State,” the petition read in part.

    The petitioners said that the petition bothered on four grounds of non-compliance warranting disqualification of Sanwo-Olu and Hamzat declared as the winner of the election by INEC.

    Adediran and PDP added that the petition also bothered on another four grounds of non-compliance warranting disqualification of Rhodes-Vivour who was declared to have scored the second-highest number of votes in the election.

    The petitioners said that APC did not comply with the INEC Time Table and Schedule of Activities for the 2023 General Election which stipulated that all political parties must give 21 days notice to INEC before the conduct of the primary election.

    They added that such notice must emanate from the national office of the political party and signed by its National Chairman and National Secretary.

    “Contrary to this provision, the Lagos state chapter of the APC through her letter dated 24th May 2022 notified the State Resident Electoral Commissioner of the party primary election held on 26th May 2022., with details of venue of the said primary.

    “The notification from the state chapter of APC was therefore invalid, null and void according to the Electoral Act 2022,” it read in part.

    The petitioners added that the APC also failed to comply with the requirement of the Electoral Act 2022 that every political party sponsoring a candidate in the general election shall submit the nomination form of such candidate(s) not later than 180 days before the conduct of the general election in forms EC9.

    The petitioners also cited the omission of the Oath page in Form EC9 for the 3rd respondent, (Hamzat), which would have shown that it was not endorsed by the Commissioner for Oath within the time prescribed by the Electoral Law 2022 and without the oath page, the entire form EC9 and the information therein are worthless.

    Adediran and PDP added that Sanwo-Olu failed to attach a copy of the GCE O’Level result he claimed to have sat for in 1981 along with his form EC9 as required by the Electoral Act 2022.

    The petition read in part: “This development sparked a curiosity, with Adediran and PDP applying for the CTC of Governor Sanwo-Olu 2019 from CF001.

    “It was then discovered that a Statement of Result issued by Ijebu Ife Community Grammar School, Ijebu-Ife for May/June 1981 GCE O’ Level Examination with examination number 17624/118 which he submitted for his first term election as governor of the state was not confirmed by WAEC.

    “When JANDOR and PDP approached WAEC for confirmation, they were directed to purchase the scratch card for verification of WAEC result scratch card, which then confirmed the results as not emanating from WAEC, it came back to be a fake result.”

    The petitioners also hinged the disqualification of the governorship candidate of LP’s Rhodes-Vivour on his non-compliance of the party with the requirements of the Electoral Law in the conduct of the primary election that produced the candidate.

    Adediran and PDP said that the notice of the primary election was issued by the state chapter of LP as against the provision that it must be issued and signed by the National Chairman and Secretary of the party.

    The petitioners added that the LP used Statutory Delegates who are members of the Lagos State EXCO/Caretaker Committee in the conduct of her substitution primary election on Aug. 10, 2022 contrary to the provision of the Electoral Act 2022.

    The petitioners also established that Form EC9 for Rhodes-Vivour was signed under oath and submitted to INEC on the 4th of July 2022, exactly 37 days before the holding of the substitution primary election on Aug. 10, 2022 that produced him as the candidate of the Labour Party.

    It further read: “This makes his nomination invalid. Furthermore, Rhodes-Vivour was still a member of PDP as of June 18, 2022 when he claimed, again under oath to having registered as a member of the Labour Party.

    “Documentary evidence and newspaper report establishing his participation in the screening exercise for the running mate to the governorship candidate of the Lagos PDP, Dr. Abdul-Azeez Olajide Adediran (JANDOR), on the  June 22,  2022 was provided in the petition.

    “In line with the provision of the Electoral Act, the candidate for the office of Governor of Lagos State is not allowed to be a member of more than one political party at the time of being sponsored as a candidate for the general election, therefore his nomination is invalid.”

    Adediran and PDP thus prayed the Election Petition Tribunal to declare all the votes cast for APC and Labour Party in the March 18 guber election as wasted votes since their candidates were not qualified to have participated in the election.

    The petitioners added that since PDP scored the third-highest number of votes in the election and having satisfied the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022, Adediran (Jandor) of the PDP was the validly qualified candidate to be returned as the winner of the said election.

    Sanwo-Olu defeated 15 other contestants from various parties to emerge the winner of Saturday’s election.

    Sanwo-Olu polled 762,134 votes to defeat his closest rival of the Labour Party, Mr Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour who scored 312,329 votes in the election.

    The PDP candidate, Adediran, garnered 62,449 votes to come third in the poll.

  • Election Tribunal: APC files objection, says Obi, Labour Party’s petition lacks merit

    Election Tribunal: APC files objection, says Obi, Labour Party’s petition lacks merit

    The All Progressives Congress (APC), on Monday, prayed the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja to dismiss the petition filed by the Labour Party (LP) and its Presidential Candidate, Mr Peter Obi, against the emergence of Sen. Bola Tinubu as president-elect in the Feb. 25 election.

    The APC, the 4th respondent, urged the PEPC to reject the petition in its notice of preliminary objection marked: CA/PEPC/03/2023 and filed at PEPC’s Secretariat, Monday night, by Thomas Ojo, a member of the party’s legal team led by Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, in Abuja.

    The party asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost on the grounds that it lacked merit and was frivolous.

    Obi, the 1st petitioner, and LP, the 2nd petitioner, had sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Tinubu, Sen. Kashim Shettima and APC as 1st to 4th respondents respectively.

    The petitioners are seeking the nullification of the election victory of Tinubu and Shettima in the Feb  25 presidential poll.

    While former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) came second with  6,984,520 votes in the election; Obi came third with 6,101,533 votes.

    Abubakar and PDP are also challenging the outcome of the poll.

    However, in the petition marked: CA/PEPC/03/2023 filed by Obi and LP’s lead counsel, Livy Ozoukwu, they contended that Tinubu “was not duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the time of the election.”

    The petitioners claimed there was rigging in 11 states, adding that they would demonstrate this in the declaration of results based on the uploaded results.

    Obi and LP said INEC violated its own regulations when it announced the result despite the fact that at the time of the announcement, the totality of the polling unit results had yet to be fully scanned, uploaded and transmitted electronically as required by the Electoral Act.

    Among other prayers, the petitioners urged the tribunal to “determine that, at the time of the presidential election held on February 25,, 2023, the 2nd and 3rd respondents (Tinubu and Shettima) were not qualified to contest the election.

    “That it be determined that all the votes recorded for the 2nd respondent in the election are wasted votes, owing to the non-qualification of the 2nd and 3rd respondents.

    “That it be determined that on the basis of the remaining votes (after discountenancing the votes credited to the 2nd respondent) the 1st petitioner (Obi) scored a majority of the lawful votes cast at the election and had not less than 25 per cent of the votes cast in each of at least two-thirds of the states of the federation and the FCT and satisfied the constitutional requirements to be declared the winner of the Feb. 25 presidential election.

    “That it be determined that the 2nd respondent (Tinubu), having failed to score one-quarter of the votes cast at the presidential election in the FCT was not entitled to be declared and returned as the winner of the presidential election held on Feb. 25.””

    Responding, the APC prayed the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that Obi, the 1st petitioner, lacked requisite locus standi to institute the petition because he was not a member of LP at least 30 days to the party’s presidential primary to be validly sponsored by the party.

    It said: “The 1st petitioner (Obi) was a member of PDP until May 24, 2022.

    “1st petitioner was screened as a presidential aspirant of the PDP in Apni 2022.

    “1st petitioner participated and was cleared to contest the presidential election while being a member of the PDP.

    “1st petitioner purportedly resigned his membership of PDP on May 24, 2022 to purportedly join the 2nd petitioner (Labour Party) on  May 27, 2022.

    “2nd petitioner conducted its presidential primary on  May 30, 2022 which purportedly produced 1st petitioner as its candidate, which time contravened Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act for him to contest the primary election as a member of the 2nd petitioner.”

    The party argued that Obi was not a member of LP as at the time of his alleged sponsorship.

    The APC argued that “by the mandatory provisions of Section 77 (1) (2) and (3) of the Electoral Act 2022, a political party shall maintain a register and shall make such register available to INEC not later than 30 days before the date fixed for the party primaries, congresses and convention.”

    It stated further that all the PDP’s presidential candidates were screened on April 29, 2022, an exercise which Obi participated and cleared to contest while being a member of the party.

    It argued that the petition was incompetent since Obi’s name could not have been in LP’s register made available to INEC as at the time he joined the party.

    The APC equally argued that the petition was improperly constituted having failed to join Atiku Abubakar and PDP who were necessary parties to be affected by the reliefs sought.

    “By Paragraph 17 of the petition, the petitioners, on their own, stated that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar came second in the presidential election with 6,984,520 votes as against the petitioners who came third with 6,101,533 votes;

    “At Paragraph 102 (iti) of the petition, the petitioners urged the tribunal to determine that 1st petitioner scored the majority of lawful votes without joining Alhaji Atiku Abubakar in the petition.

    “For the tribunal to grant prayer (iii) of the petitioners, the tribunal must have set aside the scores and election of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar,

    “Alhaji Atiku Abubakar must be heard before his votes can be discountenanced by the tribunal,” it said.

    The party said the petition and the identified paragraphs were in breach of the mandatory provisions of Paragraph 4(1)(D) of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022.

    According to APC, Paragraphs 60 — 77 of the petition are non-specific, vague and/or nebulous and thereby incompetent contrary Paragraph 4(1)(d) of the Ist Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022;

    It said that the allegations of non-compliance must be made distinctly and proved on polling unit basis but none was specified or provided in any of the paragraphs of the petition.

    “Paragraphs 59-60 of the petition disclose no identity or particulars of scores and polling units supplied in 18,088 units mentioned therein,” it added.

    The party, therefore, argued that the tribunal lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain pre-election complaints embedded in the petition as presently constituted, among other arguments

    The APC urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost as same was devoid of any merit and founded on frivolity.

  • APC asks tribunal to dismiss 3 opposition parties’ petitions against Tinubu’s victory

    APC asks tribunal to dismiss 3 opposition parties’ petitions against Tinubu’s victory

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) has prayed the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC) in Abuja to dismiss petitions filed by three opposition parties challenging the victory of its presidential candidate, Sen. Bola Tinubu, in the Feb. 25 election.

    The APC urged the tribunal to discountenance the petitions, in three separate responses filed at PEPC’s Secretariat, Sunday night, by Thomas Ojo, a member of the party’s legal team led by Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, in Abuja.

    The three political parties; Action Alliance (AA), Allied Peoples Movement (APM) and Action People’s Party (APP) had, in separate petitions, challenged the emergence of Tinubu as president-elect.

    AA, in the petition, sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), APC, Tinubu and Hamza Al-Mustapha, its factional presidential candidate and former CSO to late Gen. Sani Abacha.

    APM, in its petition, joined INEC, APC, Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and Kabir Masari, who stood as vice-presidential placeholder during the primaries before he was substituted with Shettima.

    But APP dragged Tinubu, APC and INEC to court as 1st to 3rd respondents respectively.

    In the suits, marked CA/PEPC/01/2023, CA/PEPC/04/2023 and CA/PEPC/02/2023, AA and its presidential candidate, APM and APP are respectively challenging the outcome of the presidential election on the grounds of alleged substantial non-compliance with the electoral laws as well as the INEC guidelines.

    While the AA claimed that its candidate, Solomon-David Okanigbuan, was excluded from the presidential poll, based on which the election should be voided, the APM is contending that Tinubu was not qualified to contest the election on the grounds of the alleged double nomination of his vice-presidential candidate.

    It is also questioning Tinubu’s candidacy on the grounds of the substitution of the initial placeholder, Kabir Masari, with Shettima.

    On its parts, the APP claimed that Tinubu was, at the time of the election, not qualified to contest the poll by virtue of the provisions of Sections 131(c) and 142 of the Constitution and Section 35 of the Electoral Act 2022.

    Responding, the APC faulted the claim by the AA that its presidential candidate was excluded from the election, arguing that its known candidate, Mr Al-Mustapha, participated in the election.

    It stated that contrary to AA’s claim, Tinubu “was duly elected and returned as the President-elect of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, having won the majority of lawful votes cast in the said election devoid of corrupt practices or vices and in substantial compliance with the provisions of Electoral Act 2022 (as amended).”

    It argued that the ground on which the AA brought its petition “is not meritorious and facts in support of
    same are not availing to validate the petitioners’ claims and/or purported right to present the instant petition.”

    The APC added that Okanigbuan (listed as the 2nd petitioner “is not the 1st petitioner’s (AA’s validly nominated and sponsored candidate to contest the presidential elections held on Feb. 25.

    APC also argued that as against the AA’s claim, INEC (listed as the 1st respondent) did not unlawfully exclude Okanigbuan’s name because he was never the lawfully nominated and sponsored candidate of the petitioner, which did not submit his name to INEC as its candidate for the election.

    It added that there is no evidence that the AA conducted a valid primary from which Okanigbuan emerged as a candidate, noting that Al-mustapha was the actual candidate of the AA, who was recognised by INEC.

    The APC stated that Okanigbuan was not nominated and sponsored by the AA as its candidate to contest the presidential elections, adding that the party “was not and could not have been excluded from the election as it participated in the presidential election with the 4th respondent (Al-mustapha) as its candidate” who participated in the election and scored 14,542 votes.

    In its notice of preliminary objection, the APC questioned the competence of the petition, noting that it was based solely on pre-election issues.

    It said: “For an election petition to be competent, it must complain against the return and/or election of the winner of the disputed election.

    “The instant petition is neither challenging and/or questioning the election of the 2nd and/or 3rd respondent (APC/Tinubu).

    “The petition as presently constituted amounts to a pre-election matter of nomination and sponsorship of candidate(s).

    “The crux of the petition being the nomination and sponsorship of the 1st petitioner’s candidate is statute barred, having not been commenced within the mandatory 14 days provided for under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999;

    “Issues of nomination, sponsorship and exclusion of candidates for an election are issues that precede the conduct of an election and are pre-election matters that cannot be raised of canvased before an election
    tribunal.

    “Facts in support of the petition speak to intra —party issues, pre-election disputes and administrative actions of INEC triable by Federal High Court under Section 285 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as altered by the 4th Alteration Act and outside the original jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal being a Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.”

    Also in its reply, the APC prayed the tribunal to dismiss APM’s petition.

    The party, in its preliminary objection equally filed on Sunday, argued that “the petitioner (APM) alone in the absence of its sponsored candidate cannot benefit and did not have any special interest in the election or return of the 3rd respondent (Tinubu) as the winner of the election.

    The APC queried the legal capacity of the party to challenging the mode it adopted in nominating its candidate.

    The APC argued that since the APM was not a member of the party, it did not know “how it becomes the petitioner’s business how it nominates its candidates.

    “The petitioner does not fall under the category of persons that can challenge the internal working operation of the 2nd respondent (APC) regarding the nomination and sponsorship of the 2nd respondent’s candidates for the election.”

    The APC equally faulted the competence of the petition by the APP, arguing that the grounds on which it was founded is not sustainable.

    It described the petition as frivolous and an attempt to waste the court’s time.

    The presidential candidates of Labour Party (LP), Mr Peter Obi, and his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)’s counterpart, Atiku Abubakar, are also challenging the election.

    Tinubu and Shettima, the vice president-elect, are, however, within time to respond to all the petitions.

    Based on provisions of the law, a respondent has within 21 days to reply to a petition after a service.

  • Ogun guber poll: PDP, Adebutu drag INEC, APC, Gov. Abiodun before tribunal

    Ogun guber poll: PDP, Adebutu drag INEC, APC, Gov. Abiodun before tribunal

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Ogun and its governorship candidate at the March 18 election, Mr Ladi Adebutu filed a petition against the outcome of the election on Friday in Abeokuta.

    Announcing the result of the election on March 19, INEC declared the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Gov. Dapo Abiodun as winner having polled 276,298 votes against Adebutu’s 262,383 votes.

    In the petition filed on Friday, the PDP and Adebutu listed INEC, APC and Gov. Abiodun as the first, second and third respondents, respectively.

    They asked the tribunal to direct INEC to conduct fresh election in 99 polling units in 41 wards and 16 of the 20 local government areas of the state.

    They alleged that elections were either not held and or cancelled in the polling units listed because of disruption of the exercise and over-voting.

    They asked the tribunal to order the fresh election to the exclusion of APC and Gov. Abiodun.

    Petitioners’ lead counsel, Mr Goddy Uche (SAN) expressed confidence that the outcome of the petition would favour the PDP and Adebutu.

    He said the petition stood on four pillars that would knock out the result announced by INEC and expressed confidence that the tribunal will do the needful and do its best.

    “We have about three senior advocates in our team and a host of other lawyers.

    “We have up to four grounds, very solid ones. Our prayers are just that the right thing is done and the man who won is given the mantle of office,’’ he said.

    “We want the tribunal to declare that Adebutu won the highest number of valid votes cast at the election and satisfied the requirements of the Constitution.

    “We want the tribunal to declare that Adebutu ought to have been returned and is returned as the winner of the governorship election,’’ Uche said.

    Also addressing newsmen, Adebutu said: “we are here today in continuation of our pursuit of our democratic rights because we have had an election that we truly believe we have represented the people fairly.

    “The people have responded by voting fairly for us in an election we believe we won and we will continue to seek our mandate within the ambit of the law.’’

  • Presidential election petitions can be resolved in 7 days – Agbakoba

    Presidential election petitions can be resolved in 7 days – Agbakoba

    Olisa Agbakoba, SAN has said electoral matters on the presidential can be concluded within one week if the courts could be proactive.

    He noted that the tension around the call for an interim government was due to expectations that the tribunal may not deliver judgement before May 29.

    Agbakoba said under arbitration matters, orders/directions are issued peremptorily to resolve complex jurisdictional and procedural issues.

    His statement on Monday urged the presidential election tribunal to adapt the procedures very familiar with speedy conclusion of arbitration matters.

    The Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) listed the issues raised by the Labour Party, LP, and its candidate Peter Obi, who insists he won the February 25 poll.

    “…The interpretation of Section 134 of the 1999 Constitution as to whether 25 percent of votes in the FCT is compulsory; Is a candidate permitted to stand for election when he is also a senatorial candidate?; Issues regarding qualification of APC candidates,” he said.

    Agbakoba said if the petitions were arbitration proceedings, an arbitrator may issue a procedural order to address all complex disputes and deliver “a partial final award”.

    The SAN charged the tribunal and the Supreme Court to give the order, address the jurisdictional issues raised, and release final summary judgment.

    “Between the tribunal and Supreme Court, the petitions can be resolved within 7 (seven) days from today. This will cool the temperature in Nigeria on the issue of interim government etc,” he added.

    Agbakoba stated that the required speed would be a radical departure from the present policy where case management plays a limited role in judicial outcomes.

    “Speed of justice is the mantra that our judiciary must proclaim very loudly. This is needed in the presidential petitions proceedings urgently,” he stressed.

  • FCT: NNPP Senatorial candidate rejects outcome of NASS election

    FCT: NNPP Senatorial candidate rejects outcome of NASS election

    The  New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) has rejected the outcome of the National Assembly elections in the Federal Capital Territory and proceeded to the tribunal to seek redress.

    The party alleged that the process that produced Ireti Kingibe, the candidate of the Labour of Party (LP) as Senator-elect for the FCT was marred by irregularities.

    Mr Mubarak Tijjani, the NNPP’s party senatorial candidate in the FCT, said this at a news conference held in Abuja, on Thursday.

    Recall that on Feb. 25, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Mrs Ireti Kingibe of the LP as the winner of the FCT Senate seat.

    Ireti scored 202,175 votes to emerge winner, adding that Sen. Philip Aduda of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and incumbent senator came second with 100,544 votes.

    “Mr  Angulu Dobi of the All Progressives Congress (APC) placed third with 78,905 votes.”

    Tijjani claimed that the election was marred by irregularities ranging from over voting and the omission of NNPP’s logo from the ballot paper.

    “We were sabotaged; all our efforts were sabotaged and undermined.

    “I’m not trying to throw allegations but it is clear to everybody in FCT that LP and the INEC have played some certain role of sabotaging our efforts in NNPP.

    “Our logo was changed on the ballot paper, which was something that has caused NNPP a great loss in the 2023 general elections that we will never forget.

    “That is why I’m challenging the result that brought Ireti Kingibe as the Senator-elect. This is not a true democracy. Democracy did not play doing the 2023 general election,” he said.

    Tijjani also said that the Agent’s tag for his party was not provided..

    “A day to the election, they told us they forgot to print the entire tags for FCT.

    “We were trying to improvise, the following morning we saw other party agents with their tags.

    “By the time our agents who had trained to protect their votes, came to their polling units to do their assignment, they were only sent away by other party agents.

    “We are highly disappointed in LP and we are not going to relent. We have to seek for justice not just for ourselves, for our people, for our supporters but for our democracy,” he said.

  • PDP denies withdrawing election petition from Tribunal

    PDP denies withdrawing election petition from Tribunal

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has refuted media reports alleging that it has withdrawn its petition at the Presidential Election Tribunal.

    Mr. Debo Ologunagba, the PDP National Publicity Secretary, said this in a statement on Thursday in Abuja on Thursday, describing the reports as false and reprehensible fabrication.

    “The PDP states in clear terms that our party and Atiku Abubakar did not withdraw our petition against INEC, APC, and Tinubu at the Presidential Election Tribunal.

    “However, to set the record straight and for the benefit of our teeming members, supporters and the general public, the PDP clarify as follows;

    “On Monday, March 13, 2023, the Legal Team of Atiku Abubakar led by J.K Gadzama, SAN, was in court to move a Motion Exparte accompanied by an Affidavit of Urgency (CA/PEC/12M/2023).

    “The motion sought for orders directing INEC to allow us observe/participate in the process of sorting out the ballot papers used for the Presidential, Senatorial and House of Representatives elections conducted on Feb. 25 across the country,” he said.

    He added that the court directed that all parties should be put on notice and asked that PDP amend its Motion Exparte to Motion on Notice, to serve same on the parties (INEC, APC & Tinubu) and return on Wednesday, March 15, for hearing of our Motion on Notice.

    “On Tuesday, March 14, 2023, our Legal Team had a conference meeting with the Legal Team of INEC.

    “The commission gave its assurance to cooperate with our team during the inspection and sorting out of ballot papers, and to also provide election materials needed to file our petition.

    “On account of this agreement with and assurance by INEC, there was no longer need to proceed with the hearing of the Motion on Notice (CA/PEPC/13M/2023). Consequently, our Team filed a Notice of Discontinuance of the said Motion.”

    Ologunagba said that on Wednesday, March 15 PDP Legal Team returned to Court to inform the Court of the resolution reached with INEC and formally discontinued the Motion on Notice against all the Parties (INEC, APC & Tinubu).

    “The PDP is therefore on course and we are determined to pursue the case to its logical conclusion, which is the retrieval of our Presidential mandate at the Tribunal.”

    He said that the PDP appreciated the concerns of millions of Nigerians over the false report, which pointed to the fact of the overwhelming support of majority of Nigerians for the PDP and Atiku Abubakar at the Feb. 25 presidential election.

  • Presidential Poll: PDP, Atiku withdraw fresh application against INEC

    Presidential Poll: PDP, Atiku withdraw fresh application against INEC

    The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar, on Wednesday, withdrew a fresh application they filed to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to allow their agents to participate in the process of sorting out ballot papers that were used for the presidential election that held on February 25.

    Both PDP and Atiku, who are separately challenging the outcome of the election that was declared in favour of the candidate of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, Bola Tinubu, told the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, sitting at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, that they were no longer interested in the application.

    When the motion ex-parte, marked: CA/PEC/10M/2023, was called up for hearing on Wednesday, Atiku, through his team of lawyers led by Mr. Joe Kyari Gadzama, SAN, told the court that he filed a notice of discontinuance.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) gathered that the decision of Atiku who came second at the presidential election, to withdraw the application, was a fallout of a meeting his legal team held with the leadership of the electoral body on Tuesday.

    “We filed the application owing to challenges and administrative bottlenecks we encountered at the INEC office when we went for access to the election materials as ordered by the court.

    “However, before the application dated March 13 could be slated for hearing, INEC, on its own, called our legal team for a meeting.

    “It was at that meeting which held yesterday (Tuesday) that all the grey areas were sorted out, with INEC, pledging to allow our agents to observe the process of sorting out some of the electoral materials we requested for, especially the ballot papers.

    “Since that was primarily our prayer in the fresh application we filed, we felt that it would not be necessary to proceed with the hearing. So, to save judicial time, we filed a notice of discontinuance which was accordingly granted”, a member of Atiku’s legal team, who did not want his name mentioned because he was not authorized to speak on the matter, told Vanguard.

    Meanwhile, following the withdrawal of the application, Justice Joseph Ikyegh-led three-member panel struck it out.

    Specifically, Atiku had in the withdrawn application, which he predicated on 11 grounds, maintained that it was necessary for agents of his party to be present during the sorting out of the electoral materials he would need to prepare a petition he intends to lodge against the outcome of the presidential election.

    He said there was need for his agents to observe/participate in the sorting of materials he requested in all the offices of INEC nationwide, in line with the ex-parte order the court made on March 3.

    The tribunal had in the said order, directed INEC to allow the Applicants, Atiku and PDP, to inspect, scan, and carry out forensic examination and analysis of the ballot papers, data form, BVAS/and or card readers, including photocopying of the ballot papers, information stored in the computer server/IREV.

    Atiku argued that allowing the agents of his party to be on the ground while the materials are sorted out, would ensure transparency in the process and guarantee that the ballot papers would not be tampered with.

    It will be recalled that though the court ordered INEC to grant both Atiku and his counterpart in the Labour Party, LP, Peter Obi, who came third in the election, access to the electoral materials, however, in a subsequent order it made on March 8, the panel gave the electoral body the nod to reconfigure the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, BVAS, machines it used for the presidential election.

    The court held that stopping INEC from reconfiguring the BVAS would adversely affect the conduct of Governorship and State Assembly elections billed for Saturday.

    It dismissed objections that the LP and its candidate, Obi, raised against INEC’s move to reconfigure all the BVAS devices that were used for the presidential poll.

    According to the court, allowing the objections by Obi and his party would amount to “tying the hands of the Respondent, INEC”.

    It noted that INEC depositions in an affidavit, that accreditation data contained in the BVAS could not be tampered with or lost, as same would be stored and easily retrieved from its back-end server, was not controverted.

    Besides, the court directed INEC to allow the President-elect, Tinubu of the APC, to also inspect and obtain copies of the electoral material, to enable him to prepare his defence against petitions that may be lodged to overturn his election victory.

    It held that both Tinubu and his party were entitled to have access to the electoral materials.

    INEC had declared Tinubu of the APC as winner of the presidential poll, ahead of 17 other candidates that contested the election.

    According to INEC, Tinubu, scored a total of 8,794,726 votes to defeat Atiku who polled a total of 6,984,520 votes and Obi of the LP who came third with a total of 6,101,533 votes.

    Both PDP and LP had since rejected the outcome of the election and vowed to challenge it in court.

    Under the Electoral Act 2022, any candidate dissatisfied with the return made by the INEC, shall within 21 days after the date of the declaration of the result of the election, file a petition before the tribunal.

    An election tribunal shall deliver its judgement in writing within 180 days from the date the petition was filed.

  • Appeal Court begins hearing in Adeleke’s appeal against Osun tribunal judgment

    Appeal Court begins hearing in Adeleke’s appeal against Osun tribunal judgment

    The Court of Appeal, Abuja, on Monday, commenced sitting in an appeal filed by Mr. Ademola Adeleke of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against a judgment of the tribunal which invalidated his election as governor of Osun.

    The three-member panel of justices led by Justice M.F. Shuaibu, began sitting in the appeal at about 10am.

    While Adeleke is the appellant, Oyetola and the All Progressives Congress (APC) are 1st and 2nd respondents in the appeal marked: CA/AK/EPT/GOV/01/2023.

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the PDP are also joined as 3rd respondent and 4th respondents respectively.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal had, on Jan. 27, voided the July 16, 2022 election that produced Adeleke of PDP as the elected governor.

    INEC had declared Adeleke the winner of the election after polling a total of 403,371 votes.

    He was said to have won in 17 of the 30 local government areas in the state.

    But the panel led by Justice Terste Kume, in its judgment, invalidated the election and declared Mr Gboyega Oyetola of APC as the valid winner of the poll.

    The tribunal directed INEC to withdraw the certificate of return issued to Adeleke and his deputy, Kola Adewusi, both of whom had been sworn in.

    It, however, directed that the certificate of return should instead be issued to Oyetola.

    Justice Kume held that the governorship election was not held in compliance with Nigeria’s Electoral Act.

    The tribunal also held that the governorship election was characterised by over-voting.

    It said after deducting the excessive votes, the figure Oyetola polled at the election was 314, 921.

    The tribunal, thus, ordered that Oyetola should be returned as governor of Osun State.

    INEC, in its earlier results, said Oyetola won in 13 LGAs with 375,027 votes in the July 16, 2022 governorship election.

    Fifteen candidates contested for the poll which was keenly contested between Adeleke and Oyetola.

    In his petition, Oyetola, the immediate-past governor of the state, had alleged that the election was characterised by over-voting in 749 polling units.

    He also argued that Adeleke forged the academic credentials he submitted to NEC to contest for the election.

    The tribunal had commenced sitting in August 2022, a few weeks after the governorship election.

    Oyetola and the APC were petitioners in the case with Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, and Akin Olujimi, SAN, as their lead counsel.

    INEC was the 1st defendant, Adeleke the 2nd defendant, and PDP as 3rd defendant.

    The hearing was still ongoing as at the time of filing the report.