Related Posts
The battle to upturn the victory of President Muhammadu Buhari in the February 23 presidential election begins today at the Supreme Court.
While the nation’s apex court will, today, hear a fresh appeal filed by the Hope Democratic Party (HDP) to contest the declaration of President Buhari as winner of the election, the Supreme Court has fixed Wednesday to hear the appeal filed by the Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, challenging the decision of the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal which upheld the election of President Buhari.
The apex court chose to hear the appeal afresh following protest by the HDP that the court’s earlier decision which dismissed the appeal was based on technicality rather than merit of law.
In the bid to ensure that the appeal is heard within time allowed by law, the court had issued hearing notices to parties in the matter notifying them of the October 28 date for fresh hearing.
Respondents in the appeal are the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), President Buhari and the All Progressives Congress (APC).
HDP had filed a fresh motion to challenge the way and manner its appeal against President Buhari’s election was determined and dismissed on what it termed technicality rather than merit of law.
The party, in the new motion, is asking the apex court to reverse itself in the judgement delivered on October 3, which on technical ground dismissed its appeal filed against the election of Buhari.
In a fresh motion on notice brought pursuant to order 8 rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules and sections 6 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution as well as section 22 of the Supreme Court Act, the party and its presidential candidate, Chief Ambrose Albert Owuru, claimed that the judgement delivered by Justice Mary Peter Odili in favour of Buhari is invalid on the ground that it was based on technicalities of law rather than merit and justice.
The motion filed by Chukwunonyerem Njoku on behalf of the appellants pleaded with the court to restore their appeal for a fresh hearing.
The HDP and its candidate maintained that the dismissal of their appeal on technical ground was without compliance with the mandatory procedure of law.
The apex court had dismissed the HDP’s appeal on the grounds that more than one notice of appeal was filed in the same appeal contrary to the provisions of law.
Justice Odili, who delivered the lead judgement, also held that Owuru and HDP failed to appeal against the ruling delivered by the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal on August 22 which struck out their petition based on the lack of jurisdiction.
“The two notices of appeal filed by the appellants and jointly utilised is a procedure not backed by law and cannot be used. Rather the appellants have come here to tackle the decision on the merits which the court below handled out of the abundance of caution,” Justice Odili said.
Presidential candidate of HDP, Owuru confirmed that the Supreme Court has notified him and the party that the appeal will be heard afresh today.
In their petition at the tribunal, they had prayed for nullification of the February 23 election on the ground that its shift from February 16 by INEC was not in compliance with any law and, as such, a nullity.
The two appellants claimed that a referendum election was conducted by Nigerians on February 16 and won by them with over 50 million voice votes and that they should be inaugurated as President of Nigeria based on the referendum election results.
Meanwhile, one of the lawyers in Buhari’s legal team confirmed that the Supreme Court will begin hearing in the Atiku’s appeal on Wednesday.
The President’s counsel, who prefers anonymity, confirmed that the hearing notice was passed on to them by a phone call.
“CA/PEPT/ 002/2019 – SC/1211/2019 – ATIKU ABUBAKAR & 1 OR. VS INEC & 2 ORS.
“TAKE NOTICE that hearing in the appeal on the above-named petition has been slated for Wednesday, 30 October 2019 at the Supreme Court by 9a.m.
NB: Hearing Notice was by phone call,” a short messaging service (SMS) sent by the lawyer to our correspondent read.
The lawyer further confirmed that a panel that will hear that matter had been constituted.
“A panel has been constituted to hear the case. Although members of the panel are not yet made public, it is believed that the apex court would not deviate from the practice of nominating the most senior Justices into the panel.
“In the order of seniority, those likely be in the panel are the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Ibrahim Tanko Mohammad, Justices Bode Rhodes-Vivour, Mary Odili, Mohammed Musa Datijo, Sylvester Nwali Ngwuta, Kayode Ariwoola and Tokunbo Kudirat Kekere-Ekun.”
PDP on its verified official Twitter handle confirmed that a date has been fixed for hearing of the appeal.
The party said in the tweet: “Breaking News! The Supreme Court of Nigeria has scheduled to hear the appeal of the @OfficialPDPNig and @atiku/@PeterObi, arising from the judgement of the Appeal Court, on Wednesday, October 30, 2019. It’s time to #RescueNigeria.”
Spokesperson of the CUPP, Ikenga Ugochinyere, also confirmed that the coalition’s lawyers had been informed of the hearing date.
Atiku and his party had, after the February 23 election, approached the tribunal to challenge Buhari’s victory on ground of irregularity and non-qualification of the President to contest the election.
The tribunal had, however, on September 11 in a unanimous judgement, dismissed the petition on ground that the petitioners could not prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.
The tribunal went ahead to hold that Atiku has no case in his petition.
The tribunal further held that Buhari is not only qualified, but eminently qualified to contest the said election based on his academic qualification.
It consequently threw out the petition in its entirety.
Not satisfied with the judgement, Atiku had approached the apex court to challenge the judgement.
Atiku, in his 66 grounds of appeal, insisted that the five-man panel led by Justice Umar Garba erred in law to hold that President Buhari did not need to attach his academic qualification for the form CF 001 submitted to INEC.
In the appeal, the appellant argued that the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they relied on “overall interest of justice” to hold that the 2nd Respondent’s Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were properly admitted in evidence.
In the particulars of error, the appellant submitted that Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were not pleaded by Buhari who is the second Respondent.
He added that Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were not frontloaded and that no leave of court was sought pursuant to paragraph 41 (8) of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) to receive Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 in evidence.
In the particulars of error, the appellant submitted that the court below gave restrictive interpretation to Section 76 of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) in order to exclude Form CF001 from its provisions.
“The conduct of election by INEC which is 1st Respondent starts with the screening of candidates.
“No candidate can be screened unless he completes Form CF001 (Exhibit P1).
“In Form CF001, under the column for “Schools Attended/Educational Qualification with dates”, there is the clear provision: “ATTACH EVIDENCE OF ALL EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS”.
“Certificates are evidence of educational qualifications,” the appellant submitted.
However, the APC challenged the admission of the report and evidence of the three data analysts who testified for the petitioners at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal and whose evidence was admitted by the tribunal in the interest of natural justice.
The party, in the cross appeal filed by its lead counsel, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), wants the Supreme Court to expunge the evidence of the three Information Communication and Technology (ICT) experts who testified on the existence of server allegedly used by INEC to store results of the February 23 presidential election.
The three key witnesses are Segun Sowunmi, a media aide to Atiku, David Njoga, a Kenyan and Joseph Gbenga who are famous data analysts and employed by Atiku to carry out forensic analysis of the presidential election results.
They had, in their testimonies, informed the tribunal that they analysed presidential election results state by state and found discrepancies in the results credited to Atiku and President Buhari.
Specifically, they alleged that in the results sheets they analysed, the votes of Atiku were deliberately depleted while that of Buhari and APC was inflated.
But Fagbemi, in the cross appeal, pleaded with the Supreme Court for an order setting aside the evidence of the three witnesses and the documents including video clips tendered through them from the bar.
Fagbemi also wants the apex court to expunge their testimonies and documents from the record of the court for being inadmissible in law.
The APC argued that the tribunal erred in law when it held that the evidence and the documents of the three witnesses were considered in the interest of natural justice.
Fagbemi submitted that the decision of the tribunal on the point was untenable on the grounds that the issue of admissibility or otherwise of a document is a point of law and not natural justice as erroneously held by the tribunal.
Besides, the senior counsel also sought order of the apex court to strike out Atiku’s allegations of electoral malpractices in 10 states of the federation on the grounds that the allegations of the electoral fraud were vague and not specific as required by law.
The counsel said that the petitioners did not state the specific polling units where the alleged frauds were committed; hence they must be expunged for lacking in merit that can warrant the tribunal to look into them. (New Telegraph)
While the nation’s apex court will, today, hear a fresh appeal filed by the Hope Democratic Party (HDP) to contest the declaration of President Buhari as winner of the election, the Supreme Court has fixed Wednesday to hear the appeal filed by the Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, challenging the decision of the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal which upheld the election of President Buhari.
The apex court chose to hear the appeal afresh following protest by the HDP that the court’s earlier decision which dismissed the appeal was based on technicality rather than merit of law.
In the bid to ensure that the appeal is heard within time allowed by law, the court had issued hearing notices to parties in the matter notifying them of the October 28 date for fresh hearing.
Respondents in the appeal are the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), President Buhari and the All Progressives Congress (APC).
HDP had filed a fresh motion to challenge the way and manner its appeal against President Buhari’s election was determined and dismissed on what it termed technicality rather than merit of law.
The party, in the new motion, is asking the apex court to reverse itself in the judgement delivered on October 3, which on technical ground dismissed its appeal filed against the election of Buhari.
In a fresh motion on notice brought pursuant to order 8 rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules and sections 6 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution as well as section 22 of the Supreme Court Act, the party and its presidential candidate, Chief Ambrose Albert Owuru, claimed that the judgement delivered by Justice Mary Peter Odili in favour of Buhari is invalid on the ground that it was based on technicalities of law rather than merit and justice.
The motion filed by Chukwunonyerem Njoku on behalf of the appellants pleaded with the court to restore their appeal for a fresh hearing.
The HDP and its candidate maintained that the dismissal of their appeal on technical ground was without compliance with the mandatory procedure of law.
The apex court had dismissed the HDP’s appeal on the grounds that more than one notice of appeal was filed in the same appeal contrary to the provisions of law.
Justice Odili, who delivered the lead judgement, also held that Owuru and HDP failed to appeal against the ruling delivered by the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal on August 22 which struck out their petition based on the lack of jurisdiction.
“The two notices of appeal filed by the appellants and jointly utilised is a procedure not backed by law and cannot be used. Rather the appellants have come here to tackle the decision on the merits which the court below handled out of the abundance of caution,” Justice Odili said.
Presidential candidate of HDP, Owuru confirmed that the Supreme Court has notified him and the party that the appeal will be heard afresh today.
In their petition at the tribunal, they had prayed for nullification of the February 23 election on the ground that its shift from February 16 by INEC was not in compliance with any law and, as such, a nullity.
The two appellants claimed that a referendum election was conducted by Nigerians on February 16 and won by them with over 50 million voice votes and that they should be inaugurated as President of Nigeria based on the referendum election results.
Meanwhile, one of the lawyers in Buhari’s legal team confirmed that the Supreme Court will begin hearing in the Atiku’s appeal on Wednesday.
The President’s counsel, who prefers anonymity, confirmed that the hearing notice was passed on to them by a phone call.
“CA/PEPT/ 002/2019 – SC/1211/2019 – ATIKU ABUBAKAR & 1 OR. VS INEC & 2 ORS.
“TAKE NOTICE that hearing in the appeal on the above-named petition has been slated for Wednesday, 30 October 2019 at the Supreme Court by 9a.m.
NB: Hearing Notice was by phone call,” a short messaging service (SMS) sent by the lawyer to our correspondent read.
The lawyer further confirmed that a panel that will hear that matter had been constituted.
“A panel has been constituted to hear the case. Although members of the panel are not yet made public, it is believed that the apex court would not deviate from the practice of nominating the most senior Justices into the panel.
“In the order of seniority, those likely be in the panel are the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Ibrahim Tanko Mohammad, Justices Bode Rhodes-Vivour, Mary Odili, Mohammed Musa Datijo, Sylvester Nwali Ngwuta, Kayode Ariwoola and Tokunbo Kudirat Kekere-Ekun.”
PDP on its verified official Twitter handle confirmed that a date has been fixed for hearing of the appeal.
The party said in the tweet: “Breaking News! The Supreme Court of Nigeria has scheduled to hear the appeal of the @OfficialPDPNig and @atiku/@PeterObi, arising from the judgement of the Appeal Court, on Wednesday, October 30, 2019. It’s time to #RescueNigeria.”
Spokesperson of the CUPP, Ikenga Ugochinyere, also confirmed that the coalition’s lawyers had been informed of the hearing date.
Atiku and his party had, after the February 23 election, approached the tribunal to challenge Buhari’s victory on ground of irregularity and non-qualification of the President to contest the election.
The tribunal had, however, on September 11 in a unanimous judgement, dismissed the petition on ground that the petitioners could not prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.
The tribunal went ahead to hold that Atiku has no case in his petition.
The tribunal further held that Buhari is not only qualified, but eminently qualified to contest the said election based on his academic qualification.
It consequently threw out the petition in its entirety.
Not satisfied with the judgement, Atiku had approached the apex court to challenge the judgement.
Atiku, in his 66 grounds of appeal, insisted that the five-man panel led by Justice Umar Garba erred in law to hold that President Buhari did not need to attach his academic qualification for the form CF 001 submitted to INEC.
In the appeal, the appellant argued that the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they relied on “overall interest of justice” to hold that the 2nd Respondent’s Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were properly admitted in evidence.
In the particulars of error, the appellant submitted that Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were not pleaded by Buhari who is the second Respondent.
He added that Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were not frontloaded and that no leave of court was sought pursuant to paragraph 41 (8) of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) to receive Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 in evidence.
In the particulars of error, the appellant submitted that the court below gave restrictive interpretation to Section 76 of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) in order to exclude Form CF001 from its provisions.
“The conduct of election by INEC which is 1st Respondent starts with the screening of candidates.
“No candidate can be screened unless he completes Form CF001 (Exhibit P1).
“In Form CF001, under the column for “Schools Attended/Educational Qualification with dates”, there is the clear provision: “ATTACH EVIDENCE OF ALL EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS”.
“Certificates are evidence of educational qualifications,” the appellant submitted.
However, the APC challenged the admission of the report and evidence of the three data analysts who testified for the petitioners at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal and whose evidence was admitted by the tribunal in the interest of natural justice.
The party, in the cross appeal filed by its lead counsel, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), wants the Supreme Court to expunge the evidence of the three Information Communication and Technology (ICT) experts who testified on the existence of server allegedly used by INEC to store results of the February 23 presidential election.
The three key witnesses are Segun Sowunmi, a media aide to Atiku, David Njoga, a Kenyan and Joseph Gbenga who are famous data analysts and employed by Atiku to carry out forensic analysis of the presidential election results.
They had, in their testimonies, informed the tribunal that they analysed presidential election results state by state and found discrepancies in the results credited to Atiku and President Buhari.
Specifically, they alleged that in the results sheets they analysed, the votes of Atiku were deliberately depleted while that of Buhari and APC was inflated.
But Fagbemi, in the cross appeal, pleaded with the Supreme Court for an order setting aside the evidence of the three witnesses and the documents including video clips tendered through them from the bar.
Fagbemi also wants the apex court to expunge their testimonies and documents from the record of the court for being inadmissible in law.
The APC argued that the tribunal erred in law when it held that the evidence and the documents of the three witnesses were considered in the interest of natural justice.
Fagbemi submitted that the decision of the tribunal on the point was untenable on the grounds that the issue of admissibility or otherwise of a document is a point of law and not natural justice as erroneously held by the tribunal.
Besides, the senior counsel also sought order of the apex court to strike out Atiku’s allegations of electoral malpractices in 10 states of the federation on the grounds that the allegations of the electoral fraud were vague and not specific as required by law.
The counsel said that the petitioners did not state the specific polling units where the alleged frauds were committed; hence they must be expunged for lacking in merit that can warrant the tribunal to look into them. (New Telegraph)
