In his legal fight to dethrone Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the legitimately elected President of Nigeria, PDP presidential nominee Abubakar Atiku suffered a significant setback on Wednesday.
This is because the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal dismissed a number of the petition’s clauses that he had used to demand Tinubu’s dismissal.
A number of materials, including witness testimony, that he submitted to support his claims of irregularities and malpractices in the presidential election of February 25 were also disregarded and dismissed by the Tribunal.
Justice Moses Ugoh ruled that several portions of Atiku’s petition lack the foundation upon which they can stand and endure, making them ineligible. Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, presented these concerns on behalf of Tinubu.
Similar to what happened to his Labour Party rival Peter Obi, the court ruled that Atiku failed to submit certain facts that were essential to sustain the case.
Atiku was accused of, among other things, omitting to mention locations where ballot boxes were allegedly stolen, the techniques used to manipulate the BVAS machine, and the names of polling areas where alleged irregularities occurred.
The petitioner, who asserted that he had received the majority of valid votes, was alleged to have omitted to specify in unequivocal terms the number of valid votes that he claimed to have received.
According to the Court, Atiku claimed that Tinubu did not receive the majority of the legitimate votes but declined to disclose those votes in his plea to the Tribunal.
According to the Tribunal, the former vice president levelled serious accusations against Yahaya Bello, the governor of Kogi State, and Friday Adejoh, the head of Olamaboro Local Government in Kogi, but failed to include them as respondents in the petition.
The petition was declared to be invalid by Justice Ugoh because the Governor was denied the right to present a legal defence, as is needed, after being accused of election fraud.
The Tribunal rejected the petitioner’s claims of widespread overvoting throughout Nigeria, adding that such claims violate the law because they omit to identify the precise locations of the alleged overvoting.
Atiku’s appeal was also criticised on the grounds that it introduced various facts and charges in erroneous ways that caught the respondents off guard. It was further stated that the approach used was unfair and reduced Atiku to being only somewhat clever.
Allegations of criminal conviction, certificate fraud, and dual citizenship of Guinea against Tinubu established outside the manner of filing a petition were among the offensive new facts allegedly unjustly brought by Atiku.
On the grounds that the exhibits were created while the case was pending, Justice Stephen Jonah Adah, who read another ruling on objections against the petition, excluded some documents submitted by Atiku.
A number of important Atiku witnesses also had their testimony removed from the court file because it was given beyond the bounds of the law.
The Tribunal determined that certain petition paragraphs should be struck out for lack of merit because the PDP presidential candidate had constructed the petition in the wrong way.
