The Supreme Court has reserved judgment in the appeals filed by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi challenging the election of President Bola Tinubu.
The seven-member panel of the apex court reserved judgment after parties in the appeals adopted their respective briefs of arguments on Monday.
Atiku Abubakar and the PDP had filed a petition challenging the outcome of the February 25 presidential election, however, the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, in its judgment on September 6, held that Abubakar failed to prove all the averments in his petition.
Aggrieved, the PDP candidate filed an appeal before the apex court on September 18.
In the 35 grounds notice of appeal, the appellants submitted that the tribunal’s findings were laden with “grave errors and gross misrepresentation” which resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
In a separate application, Atiku Abubakar is appealing to the court to grant him leave to file fresh evidence against Tinubu. He had alleged that Tinubu’s academic records were fraught with discrepancies and forgeries.
At the court session on Monday, Chris Uche, counsel to Abubakar and the PDP, submitted that the issue involving Tinubu’s certificate is a “weighty, grave, and constitutional” one, which the Supreme Court should admit as fresh evidence against President Tinubu noting that the Supreme Court has a duty to look into the new evidence submitted and reach a decision by avoiding the issue of technicality.
Uche argued that the Supreme Court is not bound by the timeline on electoral disputes when it comes to issues of national interest, hence the ”period of filing an appeal at the court having elapsed” should not be allowed to affect the case.
However, Tinubu, through his counsel, Wole Olanipekun, prayed the court to dismiss the application and appeal on the grounds that the evidence Atiku and the PDP tendered has no merit.
Similarly, the Supreme court also reserved judgment in the appeal filed by Obi, candidate of the Labour Party (LP), against the election of Tinubu.
Livy Uzoukwu, counsel to the appellants, prayed the court to allow the appeal while the respondents’ counsel prayed the court to dismiss it.
Obi and his party had filed a petition challenging the outcome of the February 25 poll. Some of the issues raised against Tinubu included his failure to secure 25% of votes cast in the FCT and his forfeiture of $460,000 in the US.
They also challenged the failure of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to transmit election results electronically.
Previously, a five-member panel of the Presidential Tribunal led by Haruna Tsammani had, on September 6, dismissed Obi’s petition.
Obi then filed a 73-page notice of appeal premised on 51 grounds. In the notice of appeal, Obi and his party insisted that the tribunal erred in its findings that Tinubu won the election by the majority of lawful votes cast as they also faulted the panel for striking out several paragraphs in their petitions.
The appellants said the panel was wrong to have held that they failed to prove their allegation of non-compliance with the Electoral Act.
Consequently, they are praying the Supreme Court to “set aside the perverse judgment of the court below” and “grant the reliefs sought in the petition either in the main or in the alternative”.
Writing by Oluwaseyi Ajibade; Editing by Annabel Nwachukwu
