Day of Judgment: Tension as Presidential Election Tribunal issues ruling

The long-awaited day of judgment has arrived. In Nigeria, there is a lot of tension and anxiety.

According to Newsmen, the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, PEPT, finally announced that it had set a date to deliver judgment in petitions filed against the results of the 2023 presidential election, hours after the Presidency issued a statement on Sunday, September 3, to disclose that President Bola Tinubu will be traveling to New Delhi, India, for the G-20 Summit.

Live television coverage of the judgment delivery was promised by the PEPT.

Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) all filed separate petitions to challenge the outcome announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) after the presidential election on February 25. Tinubu will not be in the country when the tribunal decides whether to affirm his victory or nullify it.

The tribunal’s decision to schedule the ruling for a time when the President would be out of the country may have been a coincidence, but Nigerians are anxiously awaiting the panel chaired by Justice Haruna Tsammani’s decision.

Since Nigeria’s restoration to democracy in 1999, the 2023 presidential election has been one of the most hotly contested and contentious. As the tribunal prepares to release its ruling today, Wednesday, the tension surrounding the elections has grown.

Already there is tension across the country.

The Department of State Services, DSS, said in a statement on Monday, September 4, the same day the tribunal announced the date for its decision, that it had discovered intentions by some elements in some regions of the country to organize violent protests in an effort to discredit the Federal Government.

Even though the DSS made no connection between the alleged plot and the tribunal’s ruling, the language of the statement was similar to one the agency had previously issued to warn Nigerians of plans by some politicians to form an interim government following the 2023 general elections, just before former President Muhammadu Buhari handed power to Tinubu on May 29.

“Intelligence reports have indicated that the plotters include certain politicians who are desperately mobilizing unsuspecting student leaders, ethnic-based associations, youth, and disgruntled groups for the planned action.

“The Service has identified the ring leaders of the plot as well as sustained monitoring around them in order to deter them from plunging the country into anarchy,” the DSS said in the statement released on Monday, September 4.

Meanwhile, Tinubu presided over a meeting of the National Security Council at the State House in Abuja just before he left for India. ⁣⁣

The specifics of what happened at the meeting were kept private. However, a lot of Nigerians are implying that there may be some connection between the meeting and the unrest over the tribunal’s decision.

President is unconcerned by the tribunal’s decision – Presidency

However, with tensions rising as the clock counts down to the judgment, Tinubu’s spokesperson declared that the President is not worried about the decision of the tribunal.

Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, Ajuri Ngelale, made the claim when he appeared on Channels Television’s Politics Today on Monday evening.

“He’s not worried simply because he knows he won the election,” Ngelale said.

But, in a veiled reference to the controversial ‘All Eyes on the Judiciary’ billboards erected by some Nigerians ahead of the tribunal’s verdict, the presidential spokesperson added, “The President sees no need to threaten judicial officers. He sees no need to raise speculations against the integrity of judicial officers; he believes in the sanctity and integrity of the Nigerian judicial system, he believes the great men and women on the panel will make their decisions based only on the facts before them.”

According to Ngelale, “He (Tinubu) will continue to ensure that no matter what the outcome of the judgment is, he does his part and ensure that our institutions continue to be respected, not just by him, but all actors.”

However, the Labour Party immediately countered the Presidency’s assertion that Tinubu won the election.

When contacted by DAILY POST on Tuesday, September 5, the spokesperson of the Labour Party, Obiora Ifoh expressed confidence that the judgment will go the way of the party and its presidential candidate, Obi.

“We are positive that the judgment will favor the Labour Party and our presidential candidate, Peter Obi. We are also positive that the will of the people will prevail.

“Most Nigerians have waited this long and their wishes will be granted. The mandate freely expressed on February 25 will be returned to the rightful winner of the election,” Ifoh said in a message he sent to Newsmen on Whatsapp.

PDP spokesperson, Debo Ologunagba, could not be reached for comments on Tuesday. Calls to his phone were not answered. He also did not reply to an SMS sent to him.

Arguments, prayers before the tribunal

After the parties to the lawsuit adopted their last written addresses on August 1, the tribunal had since then reserved judgment.

Tinubu of the APC received 8,794,726 votes, according to the INEC-announced results, to win the presidency. With 6,984,520 votes, Atiku of the PDP came in second, and Obi of the LP took third place with 6,101,533.

Like Atiku, Tinubu won in 12 states. However, Obi won the FCT as well as 11 other states.

Tinubu’s eligibility to be President after failing to get up to 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT is one of the key issues to be determined by the tribunal in arriving at its verdict.

Atiku, Obi, and the APM are asking the tribunal to nullify the result of the 2023 presidential election.

Atiku, through his lead counsel, Chris Uche, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), had asked the tribunal to declare that Tinubu was not qualified to contest the February 25 presidential election due to a United States court ruling that ordered him to forfeit $460,000 for drug and money laundering-related offenses.

In the CA/PEPC/05/2023 petition, the PDP candidate also requested that the tribunal declare the election invalid and order a new election.

Atiku and the PDP claim that despite receiving over N355 billion for the conduct of the election, the INEC broke the terms of the revised Electoral Act by neglecting to electronically transfer the results.

In his petition CA/PEPC/03/2023, Obi asked the tribunal to overturn Tinubu’s victory. He based his arguments on Tinubu’s alleged drug trafficking offense in the US as well as his failure to garner 25% of the FCT vote.

According to Obi’s legal team, led by Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, Tinubu, due to the forfeiture of $460,000 in the US and his failure to receive 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT, should not have been declared President.

Obi’s lawyers also argued that the votes cast for Tinubu should be voided because his running mate, Kashim Shettima, was simultaneously nominated as APC candidate for Borno Central Senatorial District and the party’s vice presidential flagbearer, in violation of provisions of the Electoral Act.

The LP candidate equally faulted INEC’s claim that technical glitches were responsible for the inability to upload results on the INEC Result Viewing, IReV, portal.

Rather, according to Obi’s lawyers, INEC’s failure to upload the results was an act of sabotage designed to influence the outcome of the election.

Obi is requesting that the tribunal declare him the President-elect and order the electoral commission to grant him a certificate of return, or alternatively, declare the election void and force INEC to hold a new one.

According to the terms of sections 131(c) and 142 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the APM argued in their petition that Ibrahim Masari’s withdrawal as the APC’s vice presidential candidate rendered Tinubu’s candidacy ineligible.

According to the APM, there was a gap of about three weeks between the period that Masari expressed intention to withdraw, the actual withdrawal of his nomination, and the time Tinubu replaced him with Shettima

Arguing that Tinubu’s candidature had elapsed at the time he nominated Shettima as Masari’s replacement, the APM urged the tribunal to declare that Shettima was not qualified to contest as the vice presidential candidate of the APC as of February 25 when the election was conducted by INEC, having violated the provisions of Section 35 of the Electoral Act, 2022.

The party urged the tribunal to nullify and void all the votes scored by Tinubu in the presidential election and also set aside the Certificate of Return that was issued to him by INEC.

Tinubu and APC’s lawyers, as well as those of the Independent National Electoral Commission, are asking the tribunal to dismiss the petitions filed against the outcome of the presidential poll.

APC counsel, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, now Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, had while adopting his final written addresses argued that Tinubu’s forfeiture of $460,000 in the US was a civil matter and should not warrant disqualification from the election.

The election of President Tinubu should not be invalidated because he did not receive 25% of the vote in the Federal Capital Territory, Tinubu’s attorney Wole Olanipekun, SAN, had claimed. The FCT is considered to be the 37th state for electoral purposes.

Olanipekun urged the panel to reject the petitions because they were unfounded.

The petitioners’ assertions that the Commission’s failure to upload results to the INEC IReV portal altered the outcome of the election were refuted by INEC counsel Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN.

Insisting that the election was conducted in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, as amended, the INEC counsel told the tribunal that it was illogical for the petitioners to claim that a candidate must secure 25 percent votes in the FCT to be declared winner of the presidential poll.

All eyes are on the judiciary

Billboards with the inscription ‘All Eyes on the Judiciary’ sprung up in different parts of the country after the presidential election tribunal reserved judgment on August 1.

The billboards were eventually dismantled in controversial circumstances after the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON) ordered their removal on August 15.

ARCON said it considered the billboards as “blackmail against the Nigerian Judiciary, the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, and particularly the Honourable Justices of the Tribunal who are expected to discharge their judicial functions without fear or favor”.

However, all eyes will indeed be on the Nigerian judiciary when the tribunal delivers its verdict today, Wednesday.

Some Nigerians, who spoke to DAILY POST on Tuesday, September 5, shared their expectations on the judgement.

President, of Civil Rights Realization and Advancement Network, CRRAN, Olu Omotayo, said the tribunal’s verdict should not be based on technicalities.

Omotayo said the judgment should be based on justice, fairness and equity.

He said, “Nigerians are divided along political lines. People’s expectations are largely based on their political affiliations.

“APC, PDP, and LP supporters are all demanding that the verdict be in their favor. But much like in a football game, not all of them will succeed. Someone will prevail in the end.

But the decision must be supported by reason. Whatever conclusion they reach should be supported by solid legal principles, not by technicalities. Every Nigerian should have it in mind.

“Justice is not a one-way traffic. Justice must be done based on what the law says. The only advice for the judges of the tribunal is that their judgment should be based on justice, fairness, and equity and on sound principles of law.”

Also speaking with Newsmen, Secretary General of the Conference of Nigeria Political Parties, CNPP, Willy Ezugwu, noted that the eye of the whole world is on the tribunal.

“The world is watching, not only Nigerians. Everybody is watching the judiciary. We are watching to see what the tribunal will come up with, with all the evidence on the ground,” Ezugwu said.

He also advised against building the judgment on technicalities.

“They don’t have to arrive at the judgment on technicalities. Every person knows – no one can say they are not judges and for that reason, they are not able to decide. That is why Nigerians are crying, they are shouting, they are pronouncing that all eyes are on the judges,” he stated.