Court Declines Atiku’s Request for Live Broadcast of Proceedings

•Supreme Court to decide Tinubu’s fate over alleged double nomination May 26

Chuks Okocha and Alex Enumah in Abuja

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PREPEC), yesterday, declined request by the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, for live broadcast of the court’s proceedings of his petition.

The court rejected the request on grounds that it lacked merit, it did not advance the case of the petitioners, that there was no policy direction yet regarding live broadcast of court’s proceedings.

This was as the Supreme Court will Friday May 26, decide whether it would nullify the victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its presidential candidate in the February 25 election, Bola Tinubu, over alleged double nomination.

A five member panel of justices of the PREPEC had last Thursday, reserved judgment, shortly after lawyers to parties in the petition argued for and against the granting of the application.

Atiku and PDP, who came second in the presidential election were pleading with the court to “allow the televising of the proceedings in their petition given its significant monumental importance.”

Their lawyer, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, in moving the application also prayed the court for an order directing the modalities for the implementation of the live telecast.

However, the three respondents – the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) – opposed the request, arguing that it was inappropriate.

INEC’s lawyer, Mr Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, noted that if granted it would defeat the solemn atmosphere and the seriousness of the court.

Tinubu’s lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, stated that live telecast of the proceedings was not necessary, because the proceedings was already being given effective coverage with the array of journalists seated in court.

On his part, APC’s lawyer, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, who equated the televising of court’s proceedings to the ‘Big Brother Naija “, series, said that the application if granted would invade the privacy of even the judges.

After listening to the submissions of the counsel, Justice Haruna Tsammani, announced that judgment was reserved to a date that would be communicated to parties.

However, delivering ruling in the motion yesterday, Tsammani held that the request was not rooted from the petition Atiku filed before the Court, stating that if granted, it was capable of turning the court to a stadium or a market square, and that public proceedings “does not mean the court must sit in a stadium or a market square.”

In addition, the court observed that the case of Oscar Pistorious, O.J Simpsons and others cited by petitioners in their application did not apply to the Nigerian judiciary.

“The application is a novel one in the country and has not been provided for in any of the court’s rules or procedures,” he said, adding that for the court to do that, judicial policies and regulatory frameworks had to be put in place.

The panel, therefore, dismissed the motion for lacking merit.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court, yesterday, adjourned to May 26 to deliver its judgment in the appeal by the PDP, shortly after taking submissions from counsel representing parties in the suit.

Specifically, the PDP sought the disqualification of Tinubu and his deputy, Senator Kashim Shettima, over alleged double nomination, an act they said violated the electoral laws.

The appellant anchored its appeal on the claims that the appellate court erred in law, when it dismissed its appeal and affirmed the judgment of a trial court, which held that the suit was incompetent and lacking merit.

PDP claimed that the APC breached the law, when it nominated Shettima as senatorial candidate for Borno Central and as Vice Presidential candidate.

At yesterday’s proceedings, while APC’s lawyer, Mr Babatunde Ogala, SAN, asked the court to strike out the case on the grounds that it has become statute barred, because the 180 days stipulated by the law to hear the suit has elapsed, PDP’s lawyer, Mr Joe Agi, SAN, disagreed.

It was Agi’s position that the issue of 180 days did not apply in respect of double nomination, adding that since the act was purely an illegality, the court has the right to entertain the appeal.

“They have done that before, they did it in the case of Nwosu and APC and they will do it again,” Agim added.

The appellant, accordingly, urged the apex court to grant the appeal, set aside the concurrent decision of the two lower courts and nullify the election of Tinubu and Shettima for alleged double nomination.

The PDP had by their appeal marked: CA/ABJ/CV/108/2023 urged the appellate court to reverse the January 13 judgment by Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which dismissed its suit on the grounds that the PDP lacked locus standi to have instituted the suit.

The three member panel of justices of the Court of Appeal, in the lead judgment, held that the PDP failed to establish its locus standi in the case.

Justice James Abundaga, who delivered the judgment of the appellate court, agreed with the respondents that the PDP was a busy body, who dabbled into issues that were internal affairs of the APC.

“The appellant, having failed to disclose its locus standi, this appeal fails and it is hereby dismissed,” he said and proceeded to affirm the judgment of the Federal High Court.

Justice Abundaga further awarded N5million cost against the appellant’s lawyer, J. O. Olotu.