Nigerians fault PEPT on dismissal of election rigging claims by Obi, LP

Despite of tons of exhibits presented by the Labour Party and its candidate, Mr Peter Obi admitted by the Presidential Elections Petition tribunal (PEPT) sitting in the Court of Appeal headquarters during its earlier proceedings, the latter has dismissed their claims that the February 25 elections was riddled with malpractices.

Obi and the Labour Party had tendered several blurred electoral materials produced as certified true copies of the election conduct used by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to arrive at the eventual winner of the February 25, 2023 political exercise.

However, the court, delivering its ruling at its resumed hearing, in Abuja, Wednesday, held that the petitioners did not provide enough specific evidence to back their claims in court.

This is also as the court, Wednesday, dismissed the objection filed by the respondents, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and President Bola Tinubu that the LP candidate, Mr Obi was not a bonafide member of the Labour Party as at the time of the February 25, 2023 election.

The PEPT, in its resumed hearing to deliver judgment in the petitions filed by Obi, Labour Party and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) with its candidate, Atiku Abubakar, Wednesday, is still ruling on the electoral matters brought on by the petitioners, as it is yet to deliver judgement on the constitutional issues raised by the petitioners in the suit challenging the declaration of Bola Tinubu of the APC as winner and president-elect of the February 25 poll on March 1, by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) which is the first respondent in the suit at the PEPT.

 Mr Obi had alleged massive rigging and manipulation of election results, as well as, constitutional grounds of illegibility of Tinubu to contest or be declared winner based on criminal records of forfeiture, forged certificates, and not meeting the required 25 per cent of votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

Atiku and PDP are among others, asking the court to disqualify President Tinubu, nullify the presidential election, and order a rerun of the election.

It would be recalled that during the final written addresses by parties to the suit, last August, counsel to President Tinubu, Mr. Wole Olanipekun, SAN, canvassed that the petition filed by Obi and Labour Party challenging the results of the presidential election as announced by INEC be dismissed because the complaints of Obi and the Labour Party are lacking in merit.

According to Olanipekun, uploading results to the IREV is not part of the process of collation of results, as collation was done physically at the unit levels, as he also noted that the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IREV) was just for public view and not for collation of election results.

Olanipekun insisted that Obi was not even a member of the Labour Party based on the evidence provided in court and urged the court to dismiss the petition in its entirety.

On its part, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) through its counsel, Abubakar Mahmood, SAN, asked the court to dismiss the petition by Obi and the LP on the ground that the petitioners did not prove the allegations of malpractices and non-compliance as contained in the petition as required by law.

Mahmoud informed the court that the INEC used the technology as required, as they were all tested at various levels.

On the issue of glitch, the INEC said the petitioners failed to provide evidence that there was human interference, adding that the glitch was technical in nature.

Mahmoud also told the court that the electoral umpire has demonstrated good intention to deliver credible polls through the use of technology, adding that the petitioner (PDP, Atiku) failed to provide proof that there was human interference in the process of uploading and transmission of results.

However, delivering ruing on claims of electoral malpractices, and widespread irregularities, the court said Obi did not the particulars and the polling units.

Justice Abba Mohammed held that in a presidential election conducted in 176,866 polling units in 774 Local Government Areas, it would be improper not to specify where there were irregularities.

According to him, the petitioners only made generic allegations.

“Pleading must set out material facts and particulars. In the instant petition, there was no effort to prove specific allegations, particulars of complaints,” said the tribunal.

“The law is clear that where someone alleges irregularities in a particular polling unit, such person must prove the particular irregularities in that polling unit before that petition can succeed,” the Tribunal added.

The court said the petitioners did not prove the particular polling unit where the election did not take place nor did they specify particulars of polling units where there are alleged complainants of irregularities.

“It was only in one instance that figures were given of alleged suppressed votes and we all know that elections are about figures,” it said.

“LP alleged that INEC reduced their scores and added it to APC votes but failed to supply particulars of what they actually scored before the said reductions, neither did they supply the polling units where it happened,” the court ruled.

However, some Nigerians reacting have picked holes in the ruling, citing the tones of evidence even admitted as exhibit in court at the initial sittings of the court. The exhibits included certified true copies (CTCs) of election results forms issued by INEC and collated to arrive at the final outcome.

According to them, if the court says there are no specific evidence to back Obi and Labour Party’s claims of election rigging, it therefore means also that the same court is endorsing the blurred materials used by INEC to declare Tinubu as winner.

Continuing, they said the LP and Obi relied on CTCs provided by INEC, in addition to the INEC IReV portals to provide evidence of rigging in the February 25 election, and as such the question should have been directed at the electoral commission which they claim ‘manufactured results just to produce a preferred winner.’

“Obi and LP’s claims were even backed by report by the BBC of London which uncovered massive rigging in Rivers State in favour of the ruling APC,” some Nigerians who spoke to Oracle Today newspaper said.

The five judges presiding over the tribunal include: Justice Haruna Tsammani – Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal (as chairman); Justice Stephen Adah – Court of Appeal (Asaba division); Justice Monsurat Bolaji-Yusuf – Court of Appeal (Asaba Division); Justice Moses Ugo – Kano division; and Justice Abba Mohammed – Ibadan Court of Appeal.