Follow Us on Google
The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, and that of the Labour Party (LP), Peter Obi, have filed their appeals against the recent judgment of the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC). The five-member panel, led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, had, in their judgment delivered on September 6, 2023, dismissed the appellants’ petitions and upheld the victory of President Bola Tinubu in the February 25, 2023, election.
The panel held that the documentary and oral evidence before it could not prove the claims of irregularities and other infractions the petitioners made. The respondents and some of their supporters were happy at the ruling. They said it was a good judgment and in consonance with the principles of law, which govern electoral litigation in Nigeria. The petitioners, on their part, were disappointed. According to them, the judges relied heavily on technicalities of law, which they had even warned against at the commencement of the hearing in May. While Atiku filed 35 grounds of appeal, Obi and the LP filed 51.
Obi and LP complained, among others, that the PEPC struck out their witness statements on oath (10 out of 13 witnesses) on the grounds that the statements were filed after the expiration of the period of 21 days, as prescribed by the 1999 Constitution (as amended); that the Court of Appeal refused to follow its previous decisions in many cases that a subpoenaed witness needed not file his statement alongside the petition, and any such statement filed after the time allowed for filing the petition was competent and valid. They said the PEPC was also wrong when it struck out the witness statements on oath of the petitioners’ witness (PW4, PW7 and PW8, who were expert witnesses) on the ground that they were interested in the outcome of the petition.
Obi and LP also complained that the PEPC was wrong when it ruled that the electronic transmission of results with the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) from the polling units to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Result Viewing Portal (IReV) was not mandatory under the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, and that INEC had a discretion whether or not to use BVAS to upload and transmit the results. They cited cases to support their submission.
They also submitted that the PEPC was wrong when it declined jurisdiction to determine the issue of disqualification of Tinubu based on the alleged double nomination of his running mate, Kashim Shettima. They said it was wrong for the PEPC to decide that a winner of the presidential election did not need to score at least 25 per cent of votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), under Section 134(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
Atiku, in his own appeal, also faulted the tribunal’s ruling on electronic transmission of election results and the 25 per cent votes in the FCT, among others. He said INEC manipulated the electoral process in favour of Tinubu and prayed the court to void the All Progressives Congress’s candidate election and declare him the authentic winner of the poll. In the alternative, he requested a rerun between him and Tinubu alone. Noting that INEC failed to conduct the election in accordance with its own guidelines and the Electoral Act, 2022, Atiku said, “The lower court erred in law when it failed to nullify the presidential election held on February 25, 2023, on the ground of non-compliance with the Electoral Act of 2022, when by evidence before the court, the first respondent (INEC) conducted the election based on very grave and gross misrepresentation contrary to the principles of the Electoral Act, 2022, based on the ‘doctrine of legitimate expectation’.”
Like Obi, Atiku contended that the Electoral Act, 2022, made the use of BVAS and IReV portals mandatory in the conduct of the election. He added that INEC, through its chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu, also guaranteed publicly that it was mandatory that polling unit results should be electronically transmitted by presiding officers.
The ruling APC, President Tinubu and INEC are expected to file their briefs against the appeal in due course. At this point, we wish to remind the justices of the apex court that our electoral process is on trial and all eyes are on them. They should dwell on justice rather than the technicalities of the case. Being the highest court in the land, whatever the Supreme Court pronounces becomes law.
Nigerians have shown much interest in this election. Public expectations are high that the apex court will do justice to the appeal before it to save our democracy. It behoves on the judges to ensure that justice is not just delivered but seen to have been delivered. They should look beyond any primordial consideration they may have and let their conscience guide their actions. Above all, there is urgent need for reforms of our political and electoral systems.
