By Deborah Onyofufeke, Abuja
The All Progressive Congress (APC), President Bola Tinubu and Vice-President Kashim Shettima, closed their defence yesterday, in the petition filed by the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, who had faulted the victory of Tinubu in the February 25 polls.
The president’s legal team led by Wole Olanipekun, SAN, informed the court of their plans to close the defence of their election victory after the close of cross-examination on their star witness, Senate Majority Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele, Who stated that he is an attorney in the United States of America in New York.
He tendered his identity card showing his membership in the New York Bar, which the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel admitted in evidence.
He, however, later noted that the New York Bar Association is a voluntary association, but you have to be a lawyer to be made a member.
The witness had informed the court that in Kano State, the votes secured by Tinubu were not properly recorded and had a shortfall of 10,929 votes.
Under examination by the APC lawyer, Lateef Fagbemi SAN, the witness informed the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that he was the former chairman of the Senate Committee on Judiciary and now the Majority Leader in the Senate.
The witness also presented the observers’ preliminary report from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which stated that vote-counting processes were carried out in a transparent, simple and professional manner, in the presence of party agents, observers, and security agents in the daytime in some polling units, and with lamps in others, where voting was delayed.
He also claimed that the LP’s letter on the membership list to INEC and its register of members for Anambra State, as of 15th April, 2022, did not capture Obi’s name.
The witness testified that as an attorney who has practiced in the United States since 1999, the forfeiture of funds traced to the bank account named “Bola Tinubu” was not a criminal conviction or sentence as alleged by the Obi legal team.
He added that being an associate of Tinubu, he was aware that Tinubu is a Nigerian citizen by birth, apparently debunking claims about the president’s dual nationality.
Under cross-examination by Obi’s lawyer, Livy Uzoukwu SAN, Bamidele was asked if he saw the European Union Observer Mission’s final report on the elections.
Uzoukwu tendered the European Union Observer report on the presidential election as evidence after he questioned Bamidele on it.
Uzoukwu asked Bamidele to read paragraph 17 of the ECOWAS report which he did, citing where it noted incidents of violence, and disruptions on election day leading to the death of an LP member.
But Bamidele, said he does not agree with that paragraph, adding the violence was caused by the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPoB).
Bamidele agreed that he does not have the licence to practice law in the state of Illinois, where the US Court judgment on forfeiture came from.
But he added, “I have the licence to practice law across the United States.”
Uzoukwu asked the witness if the forfeiture of $460,000 in the account of Tinubu represents the proceeds of narcotics trafficking, the witness replied that what is contained in the judgment was a civil forfeiture.
The witness, however, noted that the US court relied on the American law dealing with money laundering in Tinubu’s forfeiture, but stressed that it was a civil matter.
APC lawyer, Lateef Fagbemi SAN, told the PEPC that it was his belief that there was no need to call a witness after Olanipekun and that APC had established its case and “we are not calling any witness.”
Subsequently, both Olanipekun and Fagbemi closed their defence in Obi’s case.
The court ordered INEC, Tinubu and the APC to file their written address within 10 days, while the petitioners have five days to file theirs.
The court held that after the final address is filed, the court would fix a date for judgment.
