‘Atiku did not score 25% in FCT, neither did Tinubu,’ PDP witnesses tell PEPT

Witnesses called by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, in a mild drama, shocked the court when they disputed positions held by their party as contained in the petition before the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) court sitting in Abuja, Monday.

According to the witnesses, the PDP did not score 25 per cent of total votes cast during the February 25 election, as claimed by sought by Atiku, but were also quick to add that the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate who was declared as winner of the poll, Bola Tinubu, did not either.

According to the witnesses, Atiku did not score 25 per cent of votes cast in the FCT, yet INEC declared him winner and president-elect, as they demanded that the court equally declare their candidate, Atiku winner, despite not securing 25 per cent in the territory.

It would be noted that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had declared Tinubu winner and president-elect of the February 25 elections despite outrage by opposition parties who subsequently filed petitions before the PEPT challenging the decision on multiple grounds, including clarification of the status of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in relation to the constitutional interpretation to the 25 per cent of total votes cast in election.

During cross-examination of the PDP’s witnesses, the INEC counsel further contradicted the electoral commission by tacitly admitting that 25 per cent score in the elections was mandatory to be declared a winner; a situation which the then president-elect did not attain to be controversially announced as winner of the February 25 exercise.

Atiku/PDP, and LP/Obi petitions variously seek the annulment of Tinubu as winner and president-elect.

The witness was further asked why then he maintained in his witness statement that Atiku was entitled to be returned as president despite not garnering 25 percent votes from FCT.

The witness said “it is not wrong”, saying if Tinubu who did not score 25 percent in FCT was returned, Atiku is entitled to be returned as president.

This is even as INEC’s lawyer had told PDP’s FCT witness that Atiku scored only 15% in FCT, which means he cannot be made the president since he did not score the required 25% in FCT.

Atiku’s Witness responded with a ‘yes’ but adding ‘Tinubu did not score 25% and INEC declared him president.’

Full Cross examination:

INEC counsel: You will agree with me that Atiku scored 15% in FCT

Witness: Yes

INEC: So that means he cannot be made the president since he did not score 25% in FCT?

‘In my mind I’m like ah, is this INEC’s way of telling us something’

Witness: Even Tinubu did not score 25% and you made him president.

(Everyone in the courtroom was almost on the floor from laughter)

INEC: That is not my question. Atiku scored 15% in FCT, so why did you write in your testimony that he should be declared president.

Witness: Even Tinubu did not get 25% in FCT, if they can declare him then they can also declare Atiku as president.

INEC: This question you’re asking, you’re the one standing on the table you’re shaking. And you will break that table

Witness: Even Tinubu did not score 25% and you made him president.

(Everyone in the courtroom was almost on the floor from laughter)

Another witness called by the PDP also followed in the same direction as the previous one.

Cross-examination:

INEC: Do you know the FCT Chairman of your party?

Witness: Yes I do

INEC: Are you aware your testimony and his, is exactly the same thing.

‘Witness is quiet’.

INEC: Are you aware it is the same thing? Who wrote the testimony?

Witness: I am not aware. I wrote my own and he wrote his own. Everyone wrote their own.

Up stepped, PDP chieftain, Abiye Sekibo, who had earlier announced himself as the seventh witness and asked the court to adopt his statement on oath as his evidence in court, testifying that he served as Rivers state collation agent for the PDP presidential election.

INEC’s lawyer, A.B. Mahmoud SAN, asked him if he was a politician, to which he replied that he was actively involved in politics, voted at the election and monitored about 20 polling units in his LGA.

“You couldn’t have been at other polling units at the conclusion of polls?,” Mahmoud asked him.

Responding, Sekibo said, “I was there, when they were counting and unfortunately, they could not upload the results.

“That is a false assumption because various polling units end voting at different times. I also witnessed a few of them.”

He was asked to confirm his statement on oath where he said the agents of Tinubu and APC, by their threats ensured that presiding officers could not upload polling results on election day.

“The Reports I got from our agents is that there was no upload of results across over 6,000 polling units in the state,” Sekino replied.

Akin Olujimi SAN who stood for Tinubu and Shettima asked him if he could mention the names of these agents that issued the threat as well as the presiding officers.

“I don’t have to know their names, by their actions, we should know them.” the witness replied.

Lateef Fagbemi of the APC further asked Sekibo: “You did not mention the actual figure credited to PDP?”

He agreed he did not, saying he was only trying to establish the fictitious figures declared by INEC.

“You signed the results for PDP in Rivers?” Lateef Fagbemi asked again.

“No, I don’t know who signed,” Sekibo replied.

Ibrahim Mohammed Hamza, another Collation Agent for Nasarawa state (ninth witness) said he signed results sheet under duress.

When the result sheet for Nasarawa was presented to him by the registrar, he said the result he signed was not altered and that he sent the original result given to him to his party.

“I can see my signature but the original one I signed, there was not cancellation,” he said.

Monday’s proceeding at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) court sitting in Abuja concluded with the Labour Party and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi completing their 18-state evidence of documents proving it won the February 25 election, with more reports from six additional states in the country.

During Monday’s proceedings, the petitioners tendered documents including Certified True Copies of the Form EC8A signed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from Kogi (21 LGAs), Sokoto (7 out of 23 LGAs), Ebonyi (13 LGAs), Delta (25 LGAs), Imo, Kaduna (23 LGAs) and Ondo states were tendered.

Forms EC8A, EC8B and EC8C were also tendered for Ebonyi State.

Respondents’ counsels as usual opposed their admittance, which however, did not stop PEPT Chairman, Justice Haruna Tsammani from admitting them as exhibits.

All were tendered and admitted in court as evidence before adjournment.

The LP/Obi legal team had earlier, last Friday, tendered CTC documents from 12 states in the country, including; evidence (election results) from all local government areas in Lagos, Kogi , Adamawa, Oyo, Bayelsa, and Edo states, presenting certified true copies of INEC election results from six local government areas (LGAs) in Rivers as evidence.

Also, presented were Form EC8A certified true copies sheets from one local government area in Niger (Bida), in addition to certified true copies of election results six LGAs in Rivers states.

All documents were admitted in court as exhibits, despite opposition raised by INEC legal team, joined by the Tinubu, Shettima and All Progressives Congress (APC) counsel.

Last Thursday, the LP/Obi team had also tendered Forms EC8A containing election results from Benue, Rivers, Cross River, Niger, Osun and Ekiti states, as evidence of INEC’s irregularities.

Further proceedings are now expected to shift to the LP/Obi charges against President Bola Tinubu and his Vice Kashim Shettima bordering on the Drug Case and $460, 000 Forfeiture, ‘AND’ 25% in Abuja, Shettima’s Double Nominations, INEC Not Following Electoral Law, as well as the Tinubu and Shettima’s eligibility to contest  due to the forfeiture and double nomination allegations, all which are listed in their petition before the PEPT.

Court adjourned till Tuesday, June 6 for further hearing.