Tinubu, INEC, APC Kick as Obi Presents Electronic Evidence to Prove INEC Violated Regulations 

Alex Enumah in Abuja 

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), President Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) on Friday objected to the tendering and subsequent playing of an electronic evidence aimed at establishing that the electoral umpire violated its own regulations and guidelines for the February 25 presidential election.

Besides, alleged manipulation of the process to favour candidate of the APC, the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Mr Peter Obi are alleging that INEC failed to transmit election results real time as promised by its Chairman, Prof Yakubu Mahmood.

While the petitioners have tendered plethora of documentary evidence as well as called on witnesses to prove their allegations they and not Tinubu won the presidential election, they on Friday brought electronic evidence to support their claims of breach of INEC’s rules.

The electronic evidence was obtained from Channels Television and was to be tendered by one of the station’s staff, one Lucky Obewo Isawode, a Senior Reporter/Editor.

The appearance of the witness was a result of the order of the court following an application by the petitioners to subpoenaed the television station in respect of the electronic evidence in their possession.

However, as soon as the witness was called to the box, the respondents objected to the admissibility of the evidence as well as its presentation in court.

Shortly after the oath was administered on the witness, Obi’s lawyer, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN was about leading the witness to adopt his earlier written deposition and present a video recording of statements made by Mahmood and INEC’s National Commissioner, Festus Okoye, the respondents rose in opposition.

Tinubu and Vice President kashim Shettima’s lawyer, Chief Akin Olujimi, SAN argued that the witness and his testimony was not pre-listed and front-loaded in time, according to electoral law and as such should not be admitted by the court. 

Lawyers to INEC and APC also argued along same lines in objecting to the hearing of the witness and his evidence.

It was the claim of the respondents that they ought to know what is contained in the evidence brought before the court so as to effectively cross examined the witness.

Reacting, Okutepa urged the court to dismiss the objections claiming that there is no law requiring the petitioners to avail them the content of the evidence, adding that when the recorded videos is played in the open court then the respondents can ask relevant questions.

In a short ruling, Presiding Justice, Haruna Tsammani held that ruling has been reserved till final address and ordered the witness to proceed with his adoption of deposition and subsequent video presentation.

However, the court noted that since the proceedings have far gone into the day, parties should return the following day being Saturday for the presentation of the video evidence.