By Obi, Atiku’s Fate
In the realm of Nigerian politics, the 2023 Presidential Election has been nothing short of a whirlwind, marked by intense drama, legal battles, and contentious claims. The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), situated in the heart of Abuja, is now poised to deliver a historic verdict that could reshape the political landscape of the nation. Two pivotal petitions, marked as CA/PEPC/05/2023 and CA/PEPC/03/2023, have been brought before the esteemed court. These petitions are championed by former Vice President and People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, and the Labor Party (LP) candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, respectively.
The Grounds for Dispute
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
At the heart of this legal showdown lies the fundamental question of the validity of President Bola Tinubu’s election victory on February 25. Atiku and the PDP have fervently urged the court to declare President Tinubu ineligible to contest the presidential poll, citing critical concerns about the conduct of the election. Their primary contention revolves around the refusal of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to electronically transmit the results of the presidential election, despite substantial funding allocated for this purpose.
In their compelling argument, Atiku and his legal team emphasized the significance of technological innovations introduced for the 2023 general elections. They alleged that INEC’s failure to utilize these innovations constituted a breach of the amended Electoral Act and created a window for potential manipulation of results. The staggering sum of N355 billion allocated for the election further heightened the gravity of their claims.
Delving into the Technology Conundrum
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
The crux of the matter revolves around the transmission of election results, a process aimed at enhancing transparency and result integrity. INEC introduced the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) device, designed to authenticate and verify voters and transmit results from polling units to the IReV portal. Atiku and the PDP contended that despite extensive in-house development and testing of the BVAS applications, a technical glitch occurred on the election day, lasting over four hours.
INEC, in its defense, argued that the glitch was not contrived but rather a technical hiccup. It emphasized that there was no evidence of human interference that could have compromised the election’s integrity. Additionally, INEC refuted the petitioners’ assertion that 18,088 blurred results on the IReV portal suggested the same with the original copies.
Legal Implications of Tinubu’s Past
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
Another critical aspect of the dispute centers on President Tinubu’s alleged involvement in forfeiture proceedings in the United States. Atiku’s legal team has asserted that time does not absolve individuals of past transgressions. They argued that even if the Constitution allows for forgiveness, there should still be consequences for such actions.
Peter Obi’s Perspective
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
Peter Obi, the LP candidate, echoed many of Atiku’s concerns. He contended that the election was not marred by glitches but was intentionally sabotaged to undermine its outcome. Obi highlighted the submission of blank copies of A4 papers and images among the documents certified by INEC, casting doubt on the authenticity of the results.
Furthermore, Obi’s legal team drew attention to President Tinubu’s alleged involvement in money laundering and narcotic trafficking, emphasizing Section 137 (1) (d) of the Constitution as grounds for disqualification.
Counterarguments from the Respondents
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
In defense of their victory, President Tinubu, Vice President Kashim Shettima, INEC, and the All Progressives Congress (APC) have presented robust counterarguments. They assert that the petitions lack merit and should be dismissed. INEC’s legal team argued that the presidential election was validly conducted and in substantial compliance with all relevant laws. They emphasized that the purpose of the BVAS device was authentication, verification, and result transmission, not electronic collation.
The glitch experienced by INEC was characterized as an unintended technical issue rather than a deliberate attempt to manipulate results. Furthermore, they challenged the petitioners’ claims about blurred results on the IReV portal, asserting that original copies remained clear.
Unique Perspective on FCT Votes
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
INEC countered the petitioners’ argument regarding President Tinubu’s failure to secure 25% of the votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). They deemed it illogical to insist on such a requirement, highlighting that the FCT should be treated as the 37th state during elections, without special status.
The Respondents’ Unified Stand
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
President Tinubu and Vice President Shettima, represented by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, contended that setting aside the electorates’ decision would not be in the public interest. They criticized the petitioners for failing to meet the burden of proof, accusing them of merely submitting documents without substantial evidence.
Olanipekun emphasized that President Tinubu secured one-third of the votes in the FCT and that Peter Obi lacked the standing to challenge the election’s outcome due to his absence from the LP register.
APC’s Perspective
Obi, Atiku’s Fate
The APC, represented by Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, underscored the futility of the petitioners’ claims. They argued that the issues raised had already received judicial scrutiny and resolution. Fagbemi also contended that President Tinubu’s past legal issues did not disqualify him from contesting the presidential election.
Allied Peoples Movement’s (APM) Unique Challenge
A third petition lodged against President Tinubu by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) adds another layer of complexity to this legal saga. APM argued that the withdrawal of Mr. Masari as the Vice-Presidential candidate of the APC invalidated Tinubu’s candidacy. They asserted that a three-week gap between Masari’s intention to withdraw and the nomination of Senator Shettima created a constitutional issue.
Conclusion
As the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) prepares to deliver its verdict, the political future of Nigeria hangs in the balance. The intricate web of legal arguments, allegations, and counterarguments has created a highly contentious and closely watched case. The implications of this verdict will reverberate throughout the nation, shaping the course of Nigerian politics for years to come.
