Fireworks at Tribunal

*Tinubu constitutionally disabled from contesting-Atiku

• INEC biased, not being neutral –Obi

BY ANDREW OROLUA

The Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the February 25, 2023 election, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, has told the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, in Abuja that the President-Elect Bola Ahmed Tinubu was constitutionally disabled from contesting the election.

Atiku the runner up at the election alleged that Tinubu is unfit to lead Nigeria having been indicted for drug related offences in the United States of America (USA) and made to forfeit a sum of $460,000 as a compromise agreement.

On his part, Atiku said that he has been able to run for the office of the President of Nigeria since 1993 without any controversy because unlike his main rival and the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Bola Tinubu, he is unencumbered by drugs and identity scandals.

These revelations are contained in Atiku’s response to Tinubu’s and APC’s reply to his petition challenging the process and the outcome of the February 25 presidential election.

Besides, Atiku said that his own identity, comprising age, State of Origin and educational qualifications have never been in dispute like those of Tinubu.

In the response filed by his lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, the PDP presidential candidate justified why the declaration of Tinubu as President-elect cannot stand, adding that against the law, “Tinubu holds dual citizenship of Nigeria and Guinea, having voluntarily acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Guinea”.

Similarly, Atiku accused Tinubu of not disclosing facts of his constitutional qualifications in his Form EC9 submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), contrary to the provisions of the law.

The petitioner while admitting that Tinubu may be a “Titan and a Maestro”, he however said that the “President-elect is certainly not a titan and maestro in national stature but in controversies such as age, state of origin, identity, educational qualifications represented by certificates obtained from universities and colleges”.

Apparently reacting to Tinubu’s response in which he described Atiku as a serial election loser, the former Vice President said that Tinubu is a giant in forfeiture, drug related offences and failure to disclose dual nationality to INEC.

“The comparison of the second respondent (Tinubu) with the first petitioner ( Atiku) who had attained the eminent position of Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for eight years is totally unfounded”, he said.

Justifying his request for the annulment of the declaration of Tinubu as President-elect, Atiku said that Tinubu and APC never won majority of the lawful votes cast in the February 25 presidential election.

Amongst others, the PDP presidential candidate maintained that Tinubu failed part of the constitutional requirements having failed to secure 25% of the votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, as constitutionally required.

He insisted that the return of Tinubu as the winner of the 2023 presidential election is undue, unlawful and invalid because Tinubu did not meet the constitutional requirements as to qualification.

Rather than addressing the issues raised against him and the disputed election, Atiku said that Tinubu deliberately chose not to answer points of substance in the petition and opted for extraneous facts, contradictory, evasive, speculative and vague assertions.

In reaction to another issue raised against Atiku’s petition, the former Vice President claimed that his petition did not in any way constitute a gross abuse of any court process, adding that the originating summons of February 28, 2023, filed at the Supreme Court by Adamawa, Akwa-Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta , Edo, and Sokoto states have since been discontinued.

At any rate, Atiku said that parties in the suit of the six PDP controlled states are not the same in his own petition and therefore prayed the Presidential Election Petition Court to discountenance the objections and the averments raised against the petition by Tinubu and grant him all the reliefs sought in the petition.

Meanwhile, Media Adviser to Atiku Abubakar, Mr. Paul Ibe said that the only thing common between Atiku and Tinubu is the year 1993.

He said while it was the year that Atiku started his presidential campaign run, it was also the same year that Tinubu fell to the US justice system over his indictment and conviction for drug trafficking and money laundering for which he forfeited a whopping sum of $460,000.

…PEPC : Atiku, PDP ask Court to dismiss INEC preliminary objection

The People Democratic Party, PDP, and it’s Presidential candidate in February 25,2023 general election Atiku Abubakar have asked the Presidential Election Petition Court to discountenance preliminary objection filed by Independent National Electoral Commission INEC.

They also prayed the Court to discountenance INEC averments contained in the electoral body’s reply to the Petition and grant the reliefs sought in the said petition.

Petitioners said they would ask the Presidential Election Petition Court during the pre- hearing of their petition to dismiss the preliminary objection filed by Independent National Electoral Commission INEC.

The petitioners said that contrary to INEC objection alluding that the Petition is incompetent, vague, academic and constitutes an abuse of cout process, they the Petitioners will contend that this Court is vested with jurisdiction to adjudicate on the petitioners complaints.

In response to the electoral body reply to their petition, Atiku and PDP said that

they will provide proof that Tinubu hold dual citizenships of Nigeria and Guinea .It shall be relied upon at the trial.

In specific denial of paragraph 24 of INEC’s reply, the Petitioners contend that the presiding officers at each of the..

polling units in contention were agents of INEC but were not the officials uploading the polling unit results in Form

ECBA after the 25th February, 2023 election, having completed their duties as presiding officers.

These officials could not have uploaded results between 26th February, 2O23 up to Aprll 15, 2023, and till date, when the results of the presidential election were still being transmitted to the IReV portal, or not fully transmitted.

The Petitioners in further denial of paragraphs 25 and 28 of INEC’s reply, averred that “manual collation,, is not the mode of collation prescribed by the INEC as publicly presented by its Chairman, who publicly prescribed specifically the electronic mode of collation and transmission of results as contained in INEC’ s Guidelines and Manual as the mode to be deployed in the election.

In further denial of paragraph 32 of the reply to their petition , the Petitioners deny any form of technical qlitches, but contend that INEC reneged on its Regulations to make use of its multifunctional technology known as BVAS for both accreditation and transmission electronically from polling unit real time and direct to IReV portal.

The petitioners said that disappointingly as at the date of filing this reply, not all the polling units results had

been uploaded unto the IReV and that the Statistician’s Report shall be relied upon at the trial.

READ ALSO: “I’m not ashamed of losing presidential contests”

Contrary to the averments in paragraphs 44, 49 and 50 of INEC reply, the Petitioners state that the polling unit results were not transmitted real-time, and there were no glitches,, whatsoever, as the electoral body simply refused or neglected to transmit or upload the polling unit results as mandated by its Regulations.

The Petitioners averred that INEC’s reply does not answer the points of substance in the petition but is full of extraneous facts, contradictory, evasive, speculative and vague assertions.