•Fixes May 30 for commencement of trial •Obi to conclude petition in 3 weeks
From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
The Presidential Election Petition Court has consolidated the three petitions filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Labour Party (LP), and the Allied Peoples’ Movement (APM), and their presidential candidates against the conduct and outcome of the February 25 election won by Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Party (APC).
The decision was against the wishes of both the president-elect and the ruling APC who had raised objections against the merger of the petitions.
After the ruling, the court announced that trial in the consolidated petitions will commence on May 30 with the calling of witnesses by the petitioners.
The Justice Haruna Tsammani led five-member panel made this known, yesterday, while presenting the court pre-hearing report.
All three parties are challenging the outcome of the February 25 presidential election, in which the APC candidate, Bola Tinubu, was declared winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
It is the common relief of the petitioners – Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi and APM that Tinubu’s victory be nullified by the court given the alleged wide spread malpractices during the conduct of thepresidential election.
They equally accused the electoral body of manipulating the election in favour of Tinubu and APC.
Justice Tsammani in his ruling, relied on the provisions of paragraph 50 of the First Schedule of the Electoral Act 2022 to arrived at its decision.
In addition, Justice Tsammani said the consolidation was done in the interest of justice.
“The justice of these petitions demands that this petition be consolidated,” he said.
Meanwhile, the court has ordered Obi and his party to prove their case within three weeks instead of the six weeks they requested during the pre-hearing sessions.
Thereafter, the court fixed May 30 for Obi to open his case in the substantive petition and to conclude on June 23.
The court added that it would conduct proceedings on a day-to-day basis from Mondays to Saturdays.
For the respondents in the petition – INEC, APC, Tainubu and Kashim Shettima, the vice-president-elect – they have five days each to present their defence.
On allotment of time, the petitioners have 30 minutes each to lead or cross-examine their or adverse parties’ star witnesses. The other witnesses have 20 minutes each to testify and the legal team of the adverse parties will have five minutes each for re-examining them.
Obi had through his lawyer, Livy Uzoukwu (SAN) filed his petition challenging Tinubu’s victory on 20 March – 20 days after Tinubu was declared winner of the polls by INEC.
On his part, former Vice President and candidate of PDP, Atiku Abubakar, was given the three weeks he requested to call 100 witnesses to prove his petition against Tinubu.
The court in its pre-hearing report noted that a total of 166 witnesses would be called to testify in the matter.
It stressed that star witnesses in the petition would only be allowed to adopt their written depositions make oral submissions and identify documents where it is required.
While INEC was given two days to present its defence, the President-elect, Bola Tinubu and APC, have five days each to defend the petition.
Justice Stephen Adah, who read the pre-hearing report, equally drew attention of the parties to the fact that Atiku’s petition had been merged with the one that was filed by the candidate of LP, Peter Obi and the one that was filed by APM.
The court held that consolidation of the three petitions would ensure justice in the matter, adding that the parties would adopt their final briefs of argument to enable it fix a date for judgement.
Atiku had in his joint petition with the PDP, marked: CA/PEPC/05/2023, applied for the withdrawal of the Certificate of Return that was issued to Tinubu of the ruling APC, by INEC.
He maintained that the declaration of Tinubu as winner of the presidential election was “invalid by reason of non- compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.”
Atiku further argued that Tinubu’s election was invalid by reason of corrupt practices and that he was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election.
“The 2nd Respondent was at the time of the Election not qualified to contest the Election”, Atiku said while listing grounds he said the court should consider to nullify Tinubu’s election.
He prayed the court to declare him winner of the presidential election, having secured the second highest number of lawful votes cast at the election.
Besides, Atiku told the court that the President-elect had “demonstrated inconsistency as to his actual date of birth, secondary schools he attended (Government College Ibadan); his State of origin, gender, actual name; certificates evidencing Universities attended (Chicago State University).”
He said: “The purported degree Certificate of the 2nd Respondent allegedly acquired at the Chicago State University did not belong to him but to a female (F) described as “F” in the certificate bearing the name Bola Tinubu.