President Bola Tinubu‘s request to current his protection towards petitions looking for to nullify his election has been accredited by the Presidential Election Petition Court docket, PEPC in Abuja, with proceedings scheduled for Tuesday.
Directly, President Tinubu, by means of his authorized staff headed by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, submitted an utility to provoke the method of defending his election victory instantly after INEC concluded its protection on Monday.
The petition lodged by Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, representing the Peoples Democratic Celebration (PDP), towards the 2023 presidential election consequence concerned INEC presenting a lone witness who testified.
As a part of its proof, the electoral physique introduced 4 documentary displays, certainly one of which was a letter written by Vice President Kashim Shettima on July 6, 2022, notifying the physique of his choice to withdraw because the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate for the Borno Central Senatorial election.
INEC’s lead counsel, Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, introduced Mr. Lawrence Bayode, a Deputy Director of ICT on the Fee, as a witness. Mr. Bayode submitted the letter and its accompanying certification, which have been admitted as Displays RA-1 and RA-2.
Whereas being cross-examined by Chief Olanipekun, SAN, the witness maintained that the presidential election carried out on February 25 was ‘free, honest, credible and carried out in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act.’
In response to inquiries from Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the APC’s counsel, the witness assured the court docket that the technical glitch encountered on election day had no bearing on the ultimate scores of the presidential candidates. He affirmed that the scores remained intact.
Learn additionally: Why Tinubu’s Govt, Govs Can’t Dialogue With Bandits – Sani
Moreso, the witness said earlier than the court docket that the presidential election outcomes weren’t electronically collated, emphasising that the method was carried out manually.
‘INEC doesn’t have an digital collation system,’ he insisted. The witness additional said that INEC had a restricted timeframe earlier than the presidential ballot and publicly declared that the digital transmission of election outcomes wouldn’t be attainable.
Nevertheless, beneath cross-examination by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, the counsel representing the Petitioners, the witness disclosed in court docket that INEC had formally accredited the European Union (EU) Commentary Mission to look at the 2023 normal elections.
The witness affirmed his data of the EU’s closing report on the election when requested about it throughout the continuing. His phrases: ‘Sure I’m conscious, however I’ve not seen it.’
Objections have been raised by the Respondents when the witness was proven an authorized copy of the EU’s report and requested to learn a selected excerpt from it.
The court docket’s five-member panel, with Justice Haruna Tsammani as the pinnacle, admitted the report as Exhibit RA-6 in proof, regardless of the Respondents’ try and oppose its admissibility.
With the panel’s consent, the witness learn out a paragraph from the report, whereby the EU acknowledged that the 2023 election fell wanting the promised ranges of transparency and inclusivity as declared by INEC.
Moreover, he identified a bit of the report which talked about that ‘solely 31% of outcomes uploaded in I-REV was formally or mathematically appropriate.’
Nonetheless, the witness reiterated that the technological improvements carried out by INEC have been put in place to make sure the transparency and integrity of the ends in the electoral course of.
Proper after the witness’s dismissal, INEC’s counsel knowledgeable the court docket that his consumer had no plans to name some other witnesses in relation to the matter.
