The Supreme Court has fixed Monday, October 23 for the hearing of three appeals challenging the judgement of the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC) affirming the election of President Bola Tinubu on February 25.
The court’s registrar, Zainab Garba, issued the hearing notice on Thursday.
The three appellants – the presidential candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, that of the Labour Party, Peter Obi, and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) – filed their appeals asking the Supreme Court to nullify the PEPC’s decision which upheld the victory of Tinubu on 6 September.
A five-member panel of PEPC led by Justice Haruna Tsammani had dismissed the petitioners’ suits on the grounds that they failed to substantiate their allegations of electoral fraud against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Tinubu.
When the matter comes up next week next, the Supreme Court is expected to unveil a seven-member team that will hear and determine the case.
In his appeal, Atiku’s lead lawyer, Chris Uche (SAN) anchored the case on 35 grounds, saying that the five-member panel of the PEPC erred in their verdict.
In court filings at the Supreme Court, Mr Uche contended that the PEPC’s judgement occasioned “grave error and miscarriage of justice” in its legal reasoning by upholding Tinubu’s election as president.
In the document dated 18 September, Mr Uche contended that the presidential election court failed to adequately evaluate his client’s evidence before reaching its conclusions.
Meanwhile, Atiku filed fresh evidence at the Supreme Court concerning the academic records of Tinubu which he obtained from Chicago State University (CSU) in the United States.
Although the issue of Tinubu’s academic records was dismissed by the PEPC , Atiku intends to breathe fresh life into it since he obtained the documents from the US.
In September, a US court ordered the Chicago State University to release Tinubu’s academic records to Atiku despite the President’s opposition to the release of his transcripts.
In Obi’s appeal before the Supreme Court, his lawyer, Livy Uzoukwu (SAN), filed 51 grounds in challenging the PEPC’s judgement and argued that Presidential Tribunal reached the wrong conclusions.
Uzoukwu had in one of the grounds, informed the Supreme Court that the five-member panel of the PEPC “erred in law and thereby reached a wrong conclusion” when it dismissed Obi’s suit.
The Senior Advocate also faulted the presidential election court’s evaluation of Obi’s evidence, saying that the court erroneously ruled that Obi’s case failed to establish the polling stations where electoral malpractices took place during the February presidential election.
Another political party, the APM, also lodged the third suit alleging improper nomination of Tinubu’s running mate and incumbent Vice President Kashim Shettima.
In its appeal at Supreme Supreme, APM’s lawyer, Chukwuma–Machukwu–Ume (SAN), predicated his client’s suit on 10 grounds.
Machukwu-Ume also prayed the apex court to nullify the PEPC verdict for its numerous errors in law.
APM’s suit was not based solely on nomination, but primarily that President Tinubu contested the presidential election without a lawful running mate.
But Tinubu, INEC and other respondents in the suits have urged the apex court to dismiss the appeals for lack of merit.
The lead lawyer to Tinubu, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), also said Atiku and Obi have failed to prove all their allegations at the PEPC, saying that the tribunal was right in arriving at its decision affirming Tinubu’s victory.
