The Presidential Election Petitions Court says the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, failed to prove that President Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) was convicted for money laundering in the United States.
The five-man panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani ruled that no record of criminal arrest and conviction was established against Tinubu by the petitioners, Obi and the LP.
The PEPC also dismissed the allegation by the LP, and its candidate, Obi that the 2023 presidential election was rigged in Tinubu’s favour.
In its preliminary ruling, delivered by Justice Abba Mohammed, the court held that Obi and the LP did not, by way of credible evidence, establish their allegation that the election was characterised by manifest corrupt practices.
It held that, although the petitioners alleged that the election was marred by irregularities, they, however, failed to give specific details of where the alleged infractions took place.
The court noted that, whereas Obi and the LP insisted that the election was rigged in 18,088 polling units across the federation, they were unable to state the locations of the said polling units.
It further held that Obi’s allegation that fictitious results were recorded to Tinubu and the APC by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was not proved.
The court held that the petitioners were unable to state the figures they claimed were reduced from election results they garnered in different states of the federation, especially in Ondo, Oyo, Rivers, Yobe, Borno, Tabara, Osun and Lagos States.
It held that the petitioners equally failed to state the polling units where over-voting occurred or the exact figures of unlawful votes that were credited to Tinubu by the INEC .
It stressed that though Obi and LP said they would rely on spreadsheets as well as forensic report and expert analysis of their expert witnesses, they failed to attach the documents to the petition or serve same on the Respondents as required by the law.
The court held that though the petition contained serious allegations that bordered on violence, non-voting, suppression of votes, fictitious entry of election results and corrupt practices, the petitioners, however, failed to give particulars of specific polling units where the incidences took place.
It held that several portions of the petition that contained the allegations, were “vague, imprecise, nebulous and bereft of particular materials”.
The court struck out paragraphs 9, 60, 61, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76, 77, 78, 83 and 89 of the petition.
The court however dismissed the contention of the respondents that Obi was not validly nominated by the LP to contest the presidential election.
It noted that the respondents had argued that Obi left the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), on 24th May 2022 and joined the LP on 27th May 2022.
The respondents argued that as at 30th May 2022, Obi, was not a valid member of the LP and could not have duly participated in its presidential primary election.
They insisted that his name could not have been contained in the membership register of the LP, which ought to be submitted to INEC, 30 days before the primary election held.
However, the court held that the issue of membership is an internal affair of a political party, which is not justiceable.
It held that only the LP has the prerogative of determining who is its member, adding that the Respondents were bereft of the legal to query Obi’s membership of the LP.
The court also held that, contrary to contention by Tinubu and the APC, the petitioners, were not under any obligation to join Alhaji Atiku Abubakar who came second in the election or his party, the PDP in the case.
It held that both Atiku and PDP are not statutory Respondents or necessary parties to the petition
He also dismissed the Labour Party and Peter Obi’s claim that 25 percent needed to win the presidential election.
The tribunal contended that FCT is like other states of the federation hence, the residents have no special privileges as the petitioners claimed.
Also, the tribunal rejected 10 out of 13 witnesses presented by Obi, saying the 10 witnesses were subpoenaed and their witness statements on oath were only filed after the hearing started.
