…Says Atiku cannot Introduce Fresh Evidence from Chicago State University Twenty – four days after the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential candidate in the 25 February Presidential Election ,Alhaji Atiku Abubakar filed his appeal against the judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court(PEPC)President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Thursday responded asking the Supreme Court to discountenance
…Says Atiku cannot Introduce Fresh Evidence from Chicago State University
Twenty – four days after the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential candidate in the 25 February Presidential Election ,Alhaji Atiku Abubakar filed his appeal against the judgement of the Presidential Election Petition Court(PEPC)President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Thursday responded asking the Supreme Court to discountenance the appeal filed by Alhaji Abubakar.
Tinubu through his counsel noted that Alhaji Atiku has not “demonstrated any reason why this Honourable Court should disturb any of the findings of the lower court, which, with all modesty are rooted in law and perfect demonstration of scholarship”.
The Supreme Court was yet to fix a date for the hearing of the appeal marked SC/CS/935/2023 while the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Olukayode Ariwoola is yet to constitute the panel to hear the appeal.
President Tinubu in his response stated that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar cannot introduce any fresh evidence at this stage of the appeal and asked the Supreme Court to dismiss application to introduce fresh evidence.
Chief Wole Olanipekun, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) lead counsel to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu described the appeal by Alhaji Abubakar against the PEPC’s judgement as a mere blockbuster with thrilling suspense and hide-and-seek.
According to Chief Olanipekun, the case of Alhaji Abubakar has no legs to stand upon and has no wings fly to the direction being sought by the former Vice President, stressing that the appeal was irritating, vague, unwarranted and has no known focus or destination.
President Tinubu claimed in the court papers he filed at the Supreme Court that he defeated Alhaji Abubakar and PDP in virtually all the states of the federation, thereby prompting the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to declare him winner after the lawful collation of the election results in the presence of agents of the appellant.
President Tinubu’s lead counsel also faulted the allegations of malpractices, non-compliance with electoral laws and non-qualifications raised against him by Alhaji Abubakar, stressing that the lower court did not find merits in any of the allegations, hence, they were dismissed.
President Tinubu, therefore , challenged the competence of Atiku’s petition, stressing that what the former Vice President dressed as statements of facts were mere hearsays with no probate values.
He also asserted that while Alhaji Abubakar claimed to have won the majority of the lawful votes cast at the election, he never gave the figure he scored at the election, stressing that what Alhaji Abubakar termed an expert report, was a mere worthless paper having been produced outside the period of the time stipulated by law thereby making it inadmissible by any court of law.
President Tinubu specifically drew the attention of the Supreme Court to the admission of Alhaji Abubakar’s witnesses that the election was free and fair except for the inability of INEC to transmit the results electorally as it earlier promised.
He further said that the non-transmission of election results electronically did not violate any law because the decision to use the electronic system was just a promise by the INEC.
“We accordingly urge this Honourable Court to affirm the decision of the lower court, while dismissing this appeal in its entirety, as same is lacking in merit and bona fide.
‘We cannot draw the curtain on this brief, without drawing the Supreme Court’s attention to another hypocritical relief being claimed by the appellants in their petition, and more particularly, that in their supplication before the Supreme Court, they are asking that their reliefs be granted.
“The alternative relief (e) put forth by the appellants at the lower court reads thus: “An Order directing the 1″ Respondent to conduct a second election (run-off) between the 1″ Petitioner and the 2″ Respondent.” Undoubtedly, this relief has exposed the pretentious attitude of the appellants, both at prosecuting their case at the lower court and before this Honourable Court. Here are the same set of appellants alleging non-qualification of the respondent, via the backdoor, that is, through their reply, on the one hand, and on the other hand, praying this Honourable Court to nullify the presidential election of February 25, 2023 and direct a second election between the 1St petitioner and the respondent.
“The logical conclusion from this approbative and reprobative posture of the appellants is that deep down in their hearts, they are convinced that the respondent won the election, but have decided to embark on this voyage of abuse of court processes.
“Lastly, may we draw the attention of the Supreme Court to the fact that at the lower court, this set of appellants did not ask for any relief that could inure to the benefit of the appellants in their final written address, as all issues formulated by them and prayers also sought by them before the lower court were targeted at the respondent, without any one of those reliefs designed for their benefit. May we quickly refer the court to the 4 issues formulated for determination in their final written address at page 6974 (vol. 9) of the record, and the concluding part of the address in paragraph 6.01 (a), (b), (c) and (d) on pages 7004¬7005 (vol. 9) of the record.
“Everything put together or summarized, this appeal is a further demonstration of the abusive nature to which the appellants have subjected court processes. The Supreme Court is urged to dismiss it”.
Alhaji Abubakar and his party, had on 29 September stormed the Supreme Court with 35 grounds of appeal seeking nullification of the declaration of Presidential Bola Ahmed Tinubu as winner of the presidential election.
Alhaji Abubakar and PDP said that the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) erred in law by not taking into cognisance the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation when the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) failed to conduct the election in accordance with its own guidelines and the Electoral Act 2022.
The doctrine of legitimate expectation was first developed in English law as a ground of judicial review in administrative law to protect a procedural or substantive interest when a public authority rescinds from a representation made to a person.
Alhaji Abubakar and PDP requested the Supreme Court to void and set aside the September 6,2023 judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court, which upheld the declaration of President Tinubu as President by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on March 1.
In the Notice of Appeal, Alhaji Abubakar prayed the apex court to declare him the authentic winner of the February 25 presidential election based on lawful votes cast by Nigerians during the poll.
He said that in the alternative, the apex court should order a rerun election to be conducted for him and President Tinubu being the 1st and 2nd runners up in the last presidential election.
