By Olusegun Olanrewaju
The Presidential Election Petitions court sitting at the Court of Appeal in Abuja will today begin the pre-hearing of the petitions challenging the victory of president-elect Bola Tinubu in the February 25 presidential elections.
The chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Yakubu Mahmood, had on March 1 declared the All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential candidate the winner of the presidential challenge.
The former Lagos state governor had polled 8.8 million votes to defeat Atiku Abubakar of the PDP who scored 6.9 million, Peter Obi of the LP who grossed 6.1 million, and 15 others.
Dissatisfied with the result, Atiku and Obi filed separate petitions seeking orders to annul the election or declare them the winners of the polls.
During the pre-hearing session today, the court will be looking at other applications filed before the main hearing of the petitions.
The election petition court is expected to provide a full timetable for hearing the substantive petitions filed against Tinubu’s victory at the election.
In the court are the presidential candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, and his Labour Party (LP) co-traveller, Peter Obi, as well as others who want Tinubu’s victory overturned on some grounds.
These include substantial non-compliance with the provisions of the constitution, the Electoral Act, and INEC’s guidelines for the conduct of the election.
Atiku had hinged his petition on five grounds. He is seeking the conduct of a fresh election due to alleged irregularities at polling units on February 25.
The Wazirin Adamawa and the PDP claimed Tinubu was declared the winner when all results and accreditation data from polling units had not been transmitted and uploaded by the electoral body charged with the responsibility of doing so.
On His part, Obi is alleging various irregularities.
He insists that Tinubu and his running mate, Senator Kashim Shettima, were not qualified to contest in the first place.
The LP presidential candidate avers that the president-elect did not win the majority of lawful votes and that he failed to garner one-quarter of votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
Also, three other political parties, the Action Alliance (AA), Allied Peoples Movement (APM), and Action Peoples Party (APP) had, in their separate petitions, challenged Tinubu’s declaration as the winner of the presidential election by INEC.
The AA, in the petition marked CA/PEPC/01/2023, has INEC, APC, Tinubu, and Hamza al-Mustapha as respondents.
In its petition numbered CA/PEPC/04/2023, the APM joined INEC, the APC, Tinubu, Shettima, and Kabir Masari as respondents.
In the petition of the APP Tinubu, the APC and INEC are the 1st to 3rd respondents, respectively, while the AA and its presidential candidate, Solomon David Okanigbuan, APM, and APP are challenging the outcome of the presidential election on the grounds of alleged substantial non-compliance with the electoral laws, as well as INEC guidelines for the conduct of the election.
While the AA claimed that its candidate, 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 running mate.
The party also questions Tinubu’s candidacy on the grounds of substituting the initial ‘placeholder’, Kabir Masari, with Shettima.
Meanwhile, the APP claimed that Tinubu was, at the time of the election, not qualified to contest the poll under the provisions of Sections 131(c) and 142 of the Constitution and Section 35 of the Electoral Act 2022.
The APC had already filed its objection to the five petitions filed against the victory of its presidential candidate, Bola Tinubu in the election, urging the tribunal to discountenance the complaints of the petitioners.
*The journey
Ahead of today’s commencement of the hearing, court records on Friday had shown that the case had been listed for hearing today.
Historically speaking, no legal challenge in previous Nigerian presidential elections had succeeded.
The hearing will be before the Court of Appeal judges, who constitute the tribunal.
Under Nigeria’s electoral laws, the first day of the hearing will see candidates’ lawyers agree on the witnesses and evidence to be used during the proceedings.
*Detailed issues
With seven prayers on five grounds, Atiku asked the tribunal to declare him the president-elect.
Alternatively, the petitioner urged the court to cancel the election and order a fresh poll due to alleged irregularities that marred the February 25 polls in thousands of balloting units.
Atiku’s legal team was led by Joe-Kyari Gadzama, SAN.
In their 66-page petition, Atiku and his party argued that as of March 1 when Tinubu was declared the winner of the election, the entire results and accreditation data from polling units had not been transmitted and uploaded by INEC.
Obi, who came third in the election, alleged that the election was characterised by various irregularities, including the non-qualification of Tinubu and his running mate, Shettima, to contest the election.
He also alleged that Tinubu failed to win the majority of the lawful votes cast in the election, and just as he could not secure one-quarter of the lawful votes cast in the FCT.
He equally alleged that the election was conducted in substantial non-compliance with the provision of the law.
*Parties upbeat, confident justice will be served
Meanwhile, ahead of the commencement of sitting by the tribunal, a member of the PDP legal team, Prof Mike Ozekhome (SAN), expressed confidence in the ability of the panel to dispense unblemished justice.
He described justice as the singular most potent force that would determine the outcome of the petition filed by the party and former vice-president, noting that the justices would be guided by a sense of responsibility to their fatherland and not the powers of the state.
He said the party had sufficient evidence to back up its claim that the declaration of Tinubu was flawed.
Ozekhome said the evidence would guide the learned Justices in giving their ruling on the disputed elections.
A spokesman for the Obi-Datti Presidential Campaign Council, Yunusa Tanko, said the tribunal understands the need to execute the cases in line with the Electoral Act.
“I think they should (be able to conclude it). The Electoral Act was very clear in stating that all cases must have finished before the handing over. So let’s see what they are going to do.
“We are still optimistic though. They know the danger of not concluding the issue on time-based on the Electoral Act. So they have got to explain to us. The rule has been given already,” he said.
