Anxiety has heightened and expectations have reached fever pitch as the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Abuja is set to give judgment in the petition filed by Atiku Abukakar, presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), and his party challenging the declaration of President Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as winner of the February 23, 2019 election.
The tribunal in a notice of hearing conveyed to parties in the petition through text messages and telephone calls, Tuesday, announced its resolution to make its findings and final decision on the petition known today (Wednesday).
A notice sighted by our correspondent, Tuesday, reads, “Re: CA/PEPT/ 002/2019 – ATIKU
ABUBAKAR & 1 OR. VS INEC & 2 ORS TAKE NOTICE that judgment in the above petition has been slated for Wednesday, 11 September 2019 at the Court of Appeal/Presidential Petition Tribunal by 9.30am.”
Eddy Olafeso, Southwest vice chairman of the PDP, expects the judiciary to uphold justice and give judgment in favour of the PDP, saying such judgment had become imperative for the country’s survival.
We expect the judiciary to uphold justice, clean and clear, because it is only if they do the needful that this country can survive. If it is based on what transpired at the presidential election, we know how that election was conducted,” Olafeso said.
Ebenezer Babatope, a former minister of transport, said Nigerians can only hope and pray for the best.
“Wednesday is the day. Don’t forget that I am a member of the PDP. But under this Buhari-led administration, let’s leave everything to God, I believe he would do it,” Babatope said.
But Biodun Salami, publicity secretary of the APC in Lagos State, said the party was hopeful of victory at the tribunal because it genuinely won the presidential election.
“I can’t say much, let’s wait for the judgment, but I am hopeful we would get a favourable judgment because we won on the field,” Salami said.
Section 134 (1) to (3) of the Electoral Act provides that an election petition should be filed, heard and determined within 180 days. In the Buhari/Atiku case, the 180 days will elapse on Sept. 15.
Atiku had on March 18, 2019 filed a petition at the tribunal claiming that he and his party defeated President Buhari, who was declared the winner of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The tribunal, headed by Justice Mohammed Garba, which began its inaugural sitting on May 7, reserved the petition for judgment on August 21 after hearing the arguments of the parties before it.
During the hearing of the petition, Atiku called 62 witnesses out of the 400 he promised to present.
On the other hand, Buhari called six. However, both INEC and APC did not call any witness. Counsel to INEC, Yunus Usman (SAN), told the tribunal that it was not necessary to call witnesses, having extracted useful information from evidence given by the petitioners’ witnesses.
In the course of presentation of arguments, the PDP presidential candidate and his party said the election was marred by irregularities.
They held that Buhari was not qualified and should not have been allowed to contest the election. They argued that President Buhari lied on oath in his form CF001 which he presented to INEC before standing for the contest.
In the final address presented on their behalf by lead counsel, Levy Uzuokwu (SAN), they drew the attention of the tribunal to a portion of Buhari’s form with INEC where he claimed to have three different certificates comprising primary school leaving certificate, the West African Examination Council (WAEC) certificate and Officer Cadet’s certificate.
Uzuokwu, therefore, urged the tribunal to nullify the participation of Buhari in the election on the grounds that he lied on oath to deceive Nigerians and to secure unlawful qualification for the election.
The PDP presidential candidate also faulted the claim by INEC that it had no central server, saying that a server is a storage facility including computers where database of registered voters, number of permanent voter cards and election results amongst others are stored for references.
He, therefore, urged the tribunal to uphold the petition and nullify the participation of Buhari in the election on the grounds that he was not qualified to have stood for the election, in addition to malpractices that prompted his declaration as the winner.
But INEC claimed not to have officially transmitted results of elections in 2019 electronically.
Counsel to INEC, Usman (SAN), urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost because the electoral body conducted the election in total compliance with the Nigerian constitution and Electoral Act 2010.
Usman insisted that INEC did not transmit election results electronically because doing so was prohibited by law and that the commission did not call any witness because there was no need to do so.
INEC further explained that there was no way Atiku could have won the election, adding that he was not declared winner of the exercise because it was satisfied that the PDP candidate did not secure majority of lawful votes during the election.
In his defence, President Buhari, through his legal team led by Wole Olanipekun, argued that Atiku’s petition was liable to be dismissed because it was lacking in evidence, merit and substance and that the petition is ill-advised and signified nothing.
He cited Section 131 of the constitution which stipulates a minimum of secondary school attendance to qualify for the election in Nigeria, adding that he cannot go beyond that and that he does not need to tender or attach certificates before he can get qualification for any election.
Olanipekun held that Section 131 and 318 of the Nigerian constitution are very clear about educational qualification.
According to Section 318 of the Constitution, “School Certificate or its equivalent” means (a) a Secondary School Certificate or its equivalent, or Grade II Teacher’s Certificate, the City and Guilds Certificate; or (b) education up to Secondary School Certificate level; or (c) Primary Six School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent.
it also means “(i) service in the public or private sector in the Federation in any capacity acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for a minimum of ten years, and (ii) attendance at courses and training in such institutions as may be acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for periods totalling up to a minimum of one year, and (iii) the ability to read, write, understand and communicate in the English language to the satisfaction of the Independent National Electoral Commission, and(d) any other qualification acceptable by the Independent National Electoral Commission”.
The APC, represented by Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), in its submission said that the petition lacked quality evidence that could warrant the nullification of the election as pleaded by the petitioners and urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition.
Speaking to BusinessDay on Tuesday, Kayode Ajulo, a legal practitioner, said as one of the counsels to one of the respondents, APC, it would not be quite ethical for him to comment on the real issue that is in court.
“But as expected, this matter is the biggest case in the country in terms of the political, economic and social factors added to it. Mind you, this is the case of the number one position in the country – the presidency – and of course it is expected to elicit a lot of reactions and anxiety, which is normal,” Ajulo said.
He said both the petitioner and the respondent in the case have done their best and the rest is left for the tribunal.
“I so much believe the tribunal will do justice particularly the presiding judge, Justice Umar Garba and all the justices. They have shown that they are up to the task. During the proceedings, I didn’t see both the petitioners and respondents accusing any of the justices of partiality, not during the sitting, and not outside,” Ajulo said.
“I am sure justice will be delivered tomorrow (today), justice will be delivered impartially and delivered based on what has been submitted and presented before the court,” he said.
Meanwhile, as the nation awaits the verdict of the tribunal, both the PDP and APC have engaged in rhetoric.
Just last week, Lai Mohammed, minister of information and culture, accused the opposition parties of spreading fake news in order to preempt the ruling of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.
Mohammed, in a statement, said the opposition should wait patiently for the impending judgment, rather than engaging in underhand tactics and resorting to self-help.
The minister, who was reacting to an alleged video in circulation on social media in which he was asking Nigerians to pardon Buhari for not having his WAEC certificate, accused the opposition of becoming desperate ahead of the ruling.
He said it was now apparent that the desperate opposition had decided to use fake news and misinformation as handy tools in their avowed determination to make Nigeria ungovernable, having lost woefully at the polls.
However, the Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP), which is part of the PDP, accused the Federal Government of panicking ahead of the tribunal ruling.
CUPP spokesperson, Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere, while reacting to the minster’s allegation, accused the Federal Government of intimidating members of the presidential election tribunal from voiding Buhari’s election.
“We know that with the judgment day of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal drawing closer, this administration has entered panic mode. We pity Mohammed and his principal because we know that all these antics are meant to intimidate members from nullifying Buhari’s election over his ineligibility,” Ugochinyere said.
He dared the Federal Government to arrest those members of the opposition if it had facts that they were behind the news of the alleged bomb blast.
FELIX OMOHOMHION, INNOCENT ODOH, Abuja, & INIOBONG IWOK, Lagos
