• INEC, Tinubu fault claim

From Godwin Tsa, Abuja

The Peoples Democratic Party and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar on Friday told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), how the results of the February 25 presidential election were manipulated in favour of President Bola Tinubu and his All Progressives Congress (APC) in three states of Niger, Borno and Ebonyi respectively.

Atiku and his political party stated this through three of their witnesses who testified before the court.

The three witness could not, however, prove the allegations under cross-examinations as they failed to state in their respective statement on oath  the polling units or wards where the alleged irregularities occurred.

Firing the first salvo was the fourth Petitioner’s witness (PW4), Sani Idris Kutigi, a former House of Representatives member from Niger State, who alleged that election results of the February 25 presidential election were manipulated in Niger State.

The former lawmaker who was led in evidence by Chief Chris Uche (SAN), said as a state collation officer for the PDP, he did not sign exhibit PC26 (INEC Form EC8D), which is the summary of collated result for the state because it was manipulated.

Under cross examination, lead counsel to INEC, Oluwakemi Pinheiro asked him if he was familiar with the process of election.

He said he was familiar with the process of the election, adding “I voted in the presidential election.”

Counsel to Tinubu and Shettima, Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, equally confronted the witness under cross-examination when he asked the witness to confirm that the PDP polling units agents performed their job very well at the respective polling units in the state. Kutigi said “Absolutely.”

When queried by Lateef Fagbemi SAN, lead counsel to APC, the witness affirmed he did not state any figure different from the results announced by INEC for Niger State, in his statement on oath.

In his evidence, the fourth Petitioner Witness witness (PW4),  Nicholas Sheriza, the PDP State Collation Agent for Borno state, claimed that some agents of the party were “chased away’ and prevented from discharging their duties.