The Judges thoroughly laid forth principles of law and quoted applicable laws, applied them to the facts in issue as submitted by the petitioners, and evaluated the evidence all permitted by the Evidence Act, 2011, as tendered throughout the trial of these three merged cases, and reached a right result. The judgement, in my opinion, revealed a lack of competent legal research and trial planning. Instead of petitioners supplying relevant documents and their lawyers conducting thorough logical trial plans, they did not allow their lawyers to do a sound job by claiming and looking at excuses or loopholes of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that could not help their case. Consider that none of the petitioners revealed their scores or statistics that made them winners, as opposed to the INEC election results. Where is the election result that the Labour Party (LP) handed former President Olusegun Obasanjo, indicating that they will win the presidential election in 2023? Major political parties have situation rooms that advise them on their performance during the election, and polling units have copies of election results. So, if they didn’t fill any agents in a specific polling location, who is to blame? Where are their election results copies at polling places? Was it for display or to be used in court?
You can’t put something on nothing, in my opinion. Petitioners failed before the tribunal and in courtrooms on how the matter was handled. For example, the LP and PDP are claiming to be opposition party winners, and it was shown that one of them is lying about winning the election. An election cannot have two winners. They do have the right to appeal the judgement to the Supreme Court, but their odds are poor.
Was the decision in your favour or against you?
Yes, please. The Tribunal decided the matter based on the facts and evidence presented to it. The petitioner bears the burden of proof since he who alleges must prove, and these Judges are bound by the Electoral Act of 2022, the Evidence Act of 2011, the Constitution of FRN 2009 as amended, and other relevant legislation and earlier Supreme Court rulings that are relevant to this issue. They were bound equally by court processes rather than realities outside the courtroom. Obi and LP stated that they will use spreadsheets, forensic reports, and expert analyses of their expert witnesses. As required by law, they failed to attach the documents to the petition or serve them on the respondents. The Court ruled that, notwithstanding the petition’s significant claims of violence, non-voting, suppression of votes, false entry of election results, and corrupt practises, the petitioners failed to provide specific polling units where the occurrences occurred.
Despite guaranteeing Nigerians that the results of the 2023 general election will be communicated electronically, the Court stated that INEC is free to choose the mode in which election results are transmitted. What are your thoughts?
I would not blame the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) for guaranteeing Nigerians that the results of the 2023 general election will be sent online. The fact that the BVAS will be used to snap and scan results to the INEC portal indicates that it is both electronic and manual.
The electronic transmission of results is a promise or INEC regulation that cannot supersede the Electoral Act or the Constitution. INEC offered a space for people to question the process, despite the fact that it does not imply that the election was manipulated. To me, the issue of INEC is at liberty to define the mode of transmitting election results; INEC is an independent body that derives its power to organise, coordinate, and conduct elections in Nigeria from the constitution of FRN 1999 as amended, and the Electoral Act 2022 is a guide on how INEC will operate in the conduct of the election, particularly sections 52 and 65 of the Electoral Act, 2022.
INEC Results Viewing Portal (IReV) is an initiative used by INEC to make their job easier by using BVAS to snap and upload results from each polling station to the INEC portal. INEC has the authority to decide whether to utilise an electronic or manual approach. It was well resolved in the case of OYETOLA vs. Governor ADELEKE. To ensure the integrity of the election process and to meet the requirements of the Act Electoral Act, each party is permitted to have a polling unit agent in each polling unit centre, who will sign after voting is completed and have a copy of the results after the same results are uploaded and taken to the collation centre in their ward. In terms of arguing the result at the polling unit, those voters or those viewing the election, or agents of the party dissatisfied, can assist in filing a complaint on the outcome before the court as an eyewitness to confirm compliance with the Act or any kind of illegality – see BUHARI VS INEC. In essence, the judgement was predicated on INEC being an independent entity with the authority to decide how election results should be communicated.
Don’t you believe this verdict will add to the chaos in three states’ off-season gubernatorial races in November?
It all depends. The Supreme Court, Nigeria’s top court, has yet to rule on this ruling. Political parties, on the other hand, should exercise every power granted to them under the Electoral Act of 2022 by ensuring they have agents at each polling station and collation centre in each ward for monitoring, as well as copies of results in their situation rooms to assist in calculating results. The final stage is result transmission, and INEC should get it right this time with its IREV or elect to send manually even though we are meant to be moving forward. According to the parties, the court disregarded important evidence given to show that the election was rigged in multiple states.
The LP questioned the Court’s refusal to allow live media coverage of the hearings and accused the panel of prejudice. Do you concur?
As the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the proceedings has been read, I am unable to agree or disagree at this time. To say the Court ignored serious evidence presented would be an understatement; however, after 12 hours of reading the Judgement, it was comprehensive, with 10 out of 13 witnesses rejected or struck out based on fundamental mistakes or errors that went to the heart of the matter from LP counsel not attaching their statement on oath or witness statement on oath along with the petition filed is a sign of their lack of readiness, and being in court now searching for witnesses or filing their statement on oath According to PEPT, the LP did not provide reliable proof to support their claim that the February 25 election was marred by obvious corruption. The Court noted that, while Obi and the LP claimed that the election was rigged in 18, 088 polling units across the federation, they were unable to specify where these polling units were located.
That Obi’s allegation that the INEC recorded fictitious results for President Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) was not proven, it held that the petitioners were unable to state the figures they claimed were reduced from election results they obtained in various states of the federation, particularly Ondo, Oyo, Rivers, Yobe, Borno, Tabara, Osun, and Lagos.
It further held that the petitioners failed to specify the polling locations where over-voting happened or the exact number of illegal votes attributed to Tinubu by the INEC. To me, media coverage of the hearings is a distraction for the Judges. Court is a public forum; all parties and their lawyers, as well as media practitioners, are welcome, and it is not governed by legislation. There was no bias there because the people concerned were in Court. I believe that avoiding this word was the reason the Judgement was televised, and that they took so long to give the Judgement that lawyers, parties, and even media practitioners fell asleep. Law does not recognise belief and assumption.
The parties are now proceeding to the Supreme Court; do you believe they will maintain President Bola Tinubu’s victory?
Based on the facts of the case, I am sceptical that the Supreme Court will sustain the victory. Furthermore, no presidential election in Nigeria has been overturned due to the challenge of showing non-compliance with the Electoral Act and how to prove that the anomalies in the election were significant enough to effect the entire election.
