|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Atiku Abubakar and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Tuesday, approached the Supreme Court in Abuja, on a 66-ground of appeal against the judgment of the presidential election petition tribunal on September 11 which affirmed the election of President Muhammad Buhari.
The tribunal had dismissed the petition of the presidential candidate of PDP, Atiku, who had sought to upturn Buhari’s election on the grounds that Buhari was not qualified to contest the election, citing irregularities and partial or non-compliance with the Electoral Act.
In a unanimous judgment, the tribunal dismissed Atiku’s petition, pointing out that the petitioners could not prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. The tribunal ruled that Atiku and the PDP failed to make a case in the petition, holding that Buhari was eminently qualified to contest the election.
In an appeal before the Supreme Court, Atiku and PDP held that the five-man panel led by Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba erred in law in holding that President Buhari did not need to attach his academic qualification to the form CF 001 submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission to secure clearance to participate in the election.
Also read: Atiku thanks Nigerians for support at Tribunal, says forces of fascism must be stopped
In ground one of the appeal, the applicants argued that the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they relied on “overall interest of justice” to hold that the 2nd Respondent’s Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were properly admitted in evidence.
In the particulars of error, the appellant submitted that Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were not pleaded by Buhari who is the second respondent in the petition.
He added that Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were not frontloaded and that no leave of court was sought pursuant to paragraph 41 (8) of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) to receive Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 in evidence.
In ground two, the appellant submitted that the Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they held thus:
“My firm view is that Section 76 of the Electoral Act is clearly inapplicable to the issues under consideration. The form referred to is the form to be used in the conduct of the election as FORM CF001 had been taken care of in Section 31 of the Electoral Act and the said FORM CF001 is tied to the steps laid down in the said Section 31 of the Electoral Act.
…details coming shortly
