President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the appeal filed by Atiku Abubakar challenging his victory in the February 25 poll.
The President said there was no basis to “disturb” the findings of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) because its verdict was “rooted in law”.
The PEPC on September 6 dismissed petitions by Atiku, Labour Party (LP)’s Peter Obi, and Allied Peoples Movement (APM)’s ChiChi Ojei petitions.
Atiku and Obi filed appeals before the apex court.
Stating that he was validly returned as the winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Tinubu added that he garnered one-quarter/25 per cent of the total votes in 29 states.
He said Atiku and the PDP only managed to secure 25 per cent of the total votes in 21 states, “as against the constitutional requirement of 24.7 states, which is the mathematical results of two-thirds of the 36 states of the federation and the FCT (making 37).”
Tinubu stated that having secured the highest number of valid votes cast and having fulfilled all constitutional requirements in that regard, INEC had no option but to declare him the winner.
He added that Atiku and the PDP, being dissatisfied with the outcome of the election, approached the PEPC “on trumped up allegations of non-compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, corrupt practices, non-scoring of a majority of lawful votes cast at the election and non-qualification of the respondent.
“The hyperbolic character of the forgoing allegations was exposed by the petition itself, which had no facts in support thereof.
“Starting from the allegation of non-qualification of the respondent, all that the appellants submitted to the lower court through their petition was that the second respondent (Tinubu) was at the time of the election not qualified to contest the election not having the constitutional threshold.”
Tinubu noted that Atiku and the PDP failed to explain what they meant by “constitutional threshold” until all the respondents filed their replies to the petition.
He added: “It was at this point that they rolled out their drums of cooked-up allegations of discrepancies in the second respondent’s (Tinubu’s) academic qualifications, dual nationality and sundry bemusing allegations from the backdoor.
“Though they had alleged that the election was riddled with non-compliance and corrupt practices, the paragraphs of their petition putting up these allegations were nothing short of vague, imprecise, generic and nebulous.
“For these allegations which ought to have been specifically demonstrated through facts and figures like polling units and numbers, the appellants, through their petition, chose to regale the lower court and the respondents with breathtaking suspense by stating that the said facts will be disclosed in their statistician’s report which was not part of the petition filed.
“It is only commonsensical that the respondents will only be able to respond to the facts in the petition and not on the crucial, albeit anticipated statistician’s report, since even the devil himself knows not the heart of man.”
Tinubu noted that of 27 witnesses called by Atiku and the PDP during proceedings at the PEPC, 13 did not have their witness statements front-loaded.
“With these, it was obvious that the appellants did not intend to prosecute a petition, but rather, to venture into some form of blockbuster, laced with thrilling suspense, stunning surprises and ecstatic hide-and-seek recreational activities.
“These necessitated a series of objections from the respondents challenging the competence of the petition, as well as the itemised nebulous paragraphs of same, the statement on oath of these subpoenaed witnesses, which were not front-loaded with the petition and tons of documents sought to be tendered, which were either irrelevant or unconforming to the mandatory rules of admissibility.”
The President argued that Atiku and the PDP did not demonstrate any reason the apex court should disturb any of the findings of the lower court, “which with all modesty, are rooted in law and perfect demonstration of scholarship.”
Tinubu added that even though Atiku challenged his qualifications, however, in his alternative prayer in court, he requested to have a run-off election with him.
He added: “The logical conclusion from this approbative and reprobative posture of the appellants is that deep down in their hearts, they are convinced that the second respondent won the election, but have decided to embark on this voyage of abuse of court process.”
The Nation
