Presidential Election Court Adjourns Atiku, APM’s Petitions till May 18

*Tinubu, APC react to live broadcast on Monday

*Atiku, PDP bigwigs witness proceedings 

Alex Enumah in Abuja

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), on Monday adjourned to Thursday May 18, hearing in the petition brought by presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in the last general election, Atiku Abubakar, against the election of Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.

Also adjourned to same May 18, is the petition of the Allied People’s Movement (APM), challenging the declaration of Tinubu as winner of the February 25 presidential election.

The adjournment was following requests by counsel to enable them harmonize all processes in the case as well as agree on applications and issues for determination by the court.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had on March 1, 2023, announced Tinubu winner of the February 25 presidential election having scored a total of 8,805,835, while Atiku came second with 6,984,640 votes.

Citing incidents of non-compliance, corrupt practices and other irregularities, Atiku and the PDP in their joint petition, on March 22 asked the court to void Tinubu’s emergence as President-elect.

At the pre-hearing session on Tuesday, a five member panel of justices of the PEPC led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, directed parties to harmonize their processes and return to the court on May 11.

When the matter was called on Thursday, counsel to the petitioners, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, informed the court of agreement by parties on the modalities for the pre-hearing session.

“We are happy to report that to make for seamless progression of the pre-hearing session, counsel for the respective parties have met and put heads together to harmonise and streamline the vital areas and components of the pre-hearing conference,” Uche said.

According to him, the first Item resolved by the various counsel is documents, stating that they agreed to set up a team that will look at the documents, with a view to eliminating objections while tendering from the bar during the hearing.

“We intend to do that between Monday and Tuesday and then prepare a schedule of documents to facilitate the hearing.

The second issue Uche noted is that of trial, stating that the petitioners on their part have filed and served all the parties subject to any modifications by the honourable court.

“Lastly with respect to motions pending before the court, we have just one motion filed on 7 May. We are yet to receive the responses of the other counsel, that is; the motion on televising the petition”, he said.

The senior lawyer added that in all, “we have been served with 4 motions. 2 by the 1st respondent and 2 from the 3rd respondent. We have reacted to the 1st one by the 1st respondent and we are preparing our responses to the other one.

“Finally, we have agreed to endeavour to file all our responses for the pending motions before the next date”.

Responding, counsel to the respondents confirmed the position of the petitioners and took turn to identify their processes.

INEC’s lawyer, Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, noted that the commission has already commenced process of reply to Atiku’s motion on televised broadcast of the proceedings.

Tinubu and the APC represented by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN and Chief Charles Uwensuyi-Edosomwan, SAN respectively however said that they will respond to the application for live broadcast on Monday, adding that if it would be convenient for the court, the motion should be heard on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Mahmoud said he has filed two motions seeking to dismiss the petition and some paragraphs therein, while Olanipekun and Uwensuyi-Edosomwan disclosed that they have also filed two and three applications respectively in respect of same.

Following the confirmation Justice Tsammani, who commended the efforts of parties urged them to abide by the agreement and sustain the cooperation they have exhibited since the commencement of the pre-hearing session.

Meanwhile, Atiku who was wearing a dark suit with a red tie on a white shirt was accompanied by PDP bigwigs to observe the proceedings.

They entered the courtroom around 8.52am few minutes to the 9am commencement of proceedings.

Amongst those on his entourage include the Acting National Chairman of the PDP, Ambassador Umar Damagun, former PDP Chairman, Chief Uche Secondus, former Cross River State Governor , Liyel Imoke, two former Governors of Adamawa State, Boni Haruna and Jubrilla Bindow, former Governor of Niger State, Babangida Aliyu, media mogul, Chief Raymond Dokpesi, amongst others.

Atiku and the PDP had on Monday filed a fresh application, seeking the court’s permission for television stations to carry live broadcast of the day to day proceedings regarding their petition.

In the motion dated May 5, and filed May 7, the petitioners are specifically praying the tribunal for “An order Directing the Court’s Registry and the parties on modalities for admission of Media Practitioners and their Equipment into the courtroom.”

They predicated the application amongst other grounds that: The matter before the Honourable Court is a dispute over the outcome of the Presidential Election held on 25th February 2023, a matter of national concern and public interest, involving citizens and voters in the 36 States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, who voted and participated in the said election; and the International Community as regards the workings of Nigeria’s Electoral Process”. 

They contended that being a unique electoral dispute with a peculiar constitutional dimension, it is a matter of public interest whereof millions of Nigerian citizens and voters are stakeholders with a constitutional right to receive.

“An integral part of the constitutional duty of the Court to hold proceedings in public is a discretion to allow public access to proceedings either physically or by electronic means.  

“With the huge and tremendous technological advances and developments in Nigeria and beyond, including the current trend by this Honourable Court towards embracing electronic procedures, virtual hearing and electronic filing, a departure from the Rules to allow a regulated televising of the proceedings in this matter is in consonance with the maxim that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done.

“Televising court proceedings is not alien to this Honourable Court, and will enhance public confidence”.

It is the submission of Atiku and PDP that, “The election of the 2nd Respondent is invalid by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.

“The election of the 2nd Respondent is invalid by reason of corrupt practices.

“The 2nd Respondent was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the Election.

“The 2nd Respondent was at the time of the Election not qualified to contest the Election”.

Atiku and PDP had pointed out that, “the non-compliance substantially affected the result of the election, in that the 2nd Respondent ought not to have been declared or returned as the winner of the Election”.