PEPT justices unanimously dismiss PDP, LP motion on live streaming of court proceedings

Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) in Abuja, at its resumed pre-hearing, Monday, ruled out the motions by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), its co-petitioner, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, as well as, the Labour Party (LP) and Mr Peter Obi, the other petitioners, for live streaming and broadcast of proceedings at the court.

The court had adjourned till Monday from its last Saturday’s pre-hearing to rule on the motion moved by the Labour Party and its co-petitioner, Mr Obi, while it had earlier reserved ruling till same day also on a similar request sought by the PDP and its co-petitioner, Atiku.

Last Saturday, it also announced that starting from Monday proceedings, court attendees will be barred from using their mobile phones inside the courtroom.

However, at the resumed pre-hearing, Monday, enforcement was lax as lawyers and other attendees entered the courtroom with their phones, despite the warning, last Saturday.

Secretary of the PEPT had announced last Saturday, that starting from Monday, May 22, no phones will be allowed in the courtroom, whether those belonging to counsels to the parties to the suit, or courtroom attendees

She said that she is ‘only following instructions,’ but did not explain further.

The PEPT pre-hearing had adjourned till Monday for ruling on the disputed live streaming motion moved by the petitioners, as counsels to the four respondents; Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), All Progressives Congress (APC), Bola Tinubu, and Kashim Shettima, had objected to the request.

Court was also to adopt the agreement reached between petitioners on the issues of consolidation pursuant to paragraph 50 of the first schedule on the number and schedule of witnesses to be called up by each petitioner (LP, Atiku, LP, Obi).

On the motion for live streaming and broadcast of court proceeding, Chairman of the PEPT, Justice Haruna Tsammani, rejected the request moved by PDP and Atiku, as well as LP and Obi, on theb grounds that it lacked justification.

The application was filed by the PDP’s presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, on May 8, seeking permission for the daily court proceedings in their case against President-elect Bola Tinubu, following the February 25 election, to be broadcasted live.

The Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, also made a similar request for televised tribunal proceedings.

The court proceeding now moves to the matter of witnesses to be presented by petitioners.

Earlier, counsels had made motion on witnesses and star witnesses to be presented at the tribunal.

Lead Counsel of the Labour Party’s legal team, Mr Awa Kalu SAN had disclosed that LP/Peter Obi ‘will require 7 weeks to give evidence in their case. They will present 50 witnesses to court who will testify for 30 minutes in court, excluding the time for any electronic demonstration of evidence. The Court will rule on it subsequently.’

PDP’s Lead Counsel Chris Uche, proposed to the court that it has over 100 witnesses to present before the tribunal, with two witnesses a day to be presented.

However, Judge Tsammani then asked the court to read Paragraph 15 of the Electoral Act, which states that ‘if there are 2 Petitions or more for a particular election, they should be consolidated as one.’

Uche SAN of the PDP team suggested that all counsels need time to study the paragraph and requested  for a stand down on this issue so they can make further consultations, according to him, ‘They want a stand down or an adjournment to consult for the modalities.’

The pre-hearing was subsequently adjourned till Monday.

Ruling on the live broadcast of court proceeding as a motion made by the PDP/Atiku legal team, Justice Tsammani said televising the court cases ‘is not provided for by the constitution and the powers are not resided hereon.’

According to him, “This panel sitting as PEPT only has the power to listen to presidential cases. The issue of televising is a policy matter. This court has no power to write that policy.

“However, the justices have authority to give a legal right or enforce the televising of proceedings for the case of fair hearing and justice.

“This court has hereby dismissed this.

In their separate positions, the justices remarked in that order;

“Avoidance of trial by ordeal of camera will better serve the interest of justice. This will aid the interests of the witnesses and protect them. I hearby agree with the lead ruling to dismiss this,” said Justice Bolaji.

“There is no provision for live broadcast. I nearby also agree with the lead ruling to dismiss this,” said Justice Ugo.

“It is imperative to note that the court has no power to make policies. Live-streaming of the proceeding of this cause has no regulatory framework to support this.

“There is no merit to allow live-streaming of the court cases.

“I hereby also dismiss this,” Justice Bello read out his position.

As it stands, the justices unanimously dismissed the motion by the PDP and Atiku for live coverage of court proceedings.

When the motion by the Labour Party and Peter Obi for the same live coverage of court proceedings came up, Tsammani read out the prayers of Labour Party and Peter Obi and the motions moved.

The judges then read their rulings on the broadcasting application, as they also reached a unanimous decision to dismiss the application to broadcast the court case live.