Headlines
No Live Coverage, Tribunal Rules, Throws Out Atiku, Obi’s Petition
- /home/rhoncare/pointblank.ng/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 27
https://pointblank.ng/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Court.jpg&description=No Live Coverage, Tribunal Rules, Throws Out Atiku, Obi’s Petition', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
- Share
- Tweet /home/rhoncare/pointblank.ng/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 69
https://pointblank.ng/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Court.jpg&description=No Live Coverage, Tribunal Rules, Throws Out Atiku, Obi’s Petition', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
The Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, sitting in Abuja, on Monday, rejected request to allow its day-to-day proceedings on petitions seeking to nullify the outcome of the 2023 presidential election, to be televised.
The Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five member panel dismissed as lacking in merit, the application which was brought before it by the two major candidates that are challenging the outcome of the presidential election that held on February 25.
The court held that no regulatory framework or policy direction, permitted it to grant such application.
It held that allowing cameras in the court room is a major judicial policy that must be supported by the law.
“The court can only be guided and act in accordance with the practice directions and procedures approved by the President of the Court of Appeal.
“We cannot permit a situation that may lead to dramatization of our proceedings,” Justice Tsammani held.
Besides, the court held that the request was not part of any relief in the petitions before it, saying it was merely hinged on sentimental claim that it would benefit the electorates.
It maintained that the petitioners failed to establish how televising the proceedings would advance their case, adding that such live broadcast would not have any utilitarian value to add to the determination of the petitions.
Whereas it was a former Vice President and candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who came second in the election, that initially made the request for a live coverage, subsequently, candidate of the Labour Party, Mr. Peter Obi, threw his weight behind the demand for live broadcast of proceedings of the court on the petitions.
The duo, through their lead lawyers, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, and Dr. Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, maintained that petitions they lodged to query the declaration of the candidate of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, as winner of the election, was “a matter of monumental national concern and public interest”.
They argued that the case involved the interest of citizens and electorates in the 36 States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, who he said voted and participated in the presidential poll.
Atiku and the PDP insisted that their case against Tinubu, being a unique electoral dispute with a peculiar constitutional dimension, they said it was a matter of public interest in which millions of Nigerian citizens and voters are stakeholders, with the constitutional right to be part of the proceedings.
They specifically applied for; “An order, directing the Court’s Registry and the parties on modalities for admission of Media Practitioners and their Equipments into the courtroom”.
“With the huge and tremendous technological advances and developments in Nigeria and beyond, including the current trend by this Honourable Court towards embracing electronic procedures, virtual hearing and electronic filing, a departure from the Rules to allow a regulated televising of the proceedings in this matter is in consonance with the maxim that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done.
“Televising court proceedings is not alien to this Honourable Court, and will enhance public confidence”, the petitioners added.
However, in separate processes they filed before the court, both Tinubu and the APC urged the court to dismiss the application which they described as an abuse of the legal process.
Tinubu, in a counter-affifavit he filed alongside the Vice President-elect, Kashim Shettima, accused Atiku of deliberately attempting to expose the judiciary to public opprobrium.
According to them, the court “is not a rostrum or a soapbox. It is not also a stadium or theatre. It is not an arena for public entertainment.”
The respondents maintained that Atiku’s request had no bearing with the petition, insisting that it was only aimed at dissipating the judicial time of the court.
They stressed that Atiku failed to realise that the virtual court system that was adopted during the Covid-19 pandemic, was backed by a practice direction that was administratively issued by the President of the Court of Appeal.
“Another angle to this very curious application is the invitation it extends to the court to make an order that it cannot supervise.
“The position of the law remains, and we do submit that the court, like nature, does not make an order in vain, or an order which is incapable of enforcement,” the respondents added.
Besides, they argued that the application was at best, “academic, very otiose, very unnecessary, very time-wasting, most unusual and most unexpected, particularly, from a set of petitioners, who should be praying for the expeditious trial of their petition.”
“Petitioners have brought their application under Section 36(3) of the Constitution which provides that the proceedings of a court/tribunal shall be held in public.
“The word ‘public’ as applied under Section 36(3) of the Constitution has been defined in a plethora of judicial authorities to mean a place where members of the public have unhindered access, and the court itself, sitting behind open doors, not in the camera.
“Even in situations where a class action is presented, the particular people constituting the class being represented by the plaintiffs or petitioners are always defined in the originating process.
“Here, in this application, the public at whose behest this application has been presented is not defined, not known, not discernable.
“Beyond all these, it is our submission that the court of law must and should always remain what it is, what it should be and what it is expected to be: a serene, disciplined, hallowed, tranquil, honourable and decorous institution and place.
“It is not a rostrum or a soapbox. It is not also a stadium or theatre. It is not an arena for ‘public’ entertainment.
“With much respect to the petitioners, the motion is an abuse of the processes of this honourable court,” Tinubu argued.
On its part, APC, through its team of lawyers led by Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, told the court that contrary to Atiku’s claim, the presidential election “is not subject matter of any national concern”, insisting that the election was “well managed by INEC with turnout of voters in their millions”.
It argued that proceedings of the court was already being adequately coveted by the media.
“There is nothing unique or peculiar in the electoral dispute that emanated from the outcome of the 25th February 2023 election that is different from the earlier five presidential elections in the country since the Advent of the Fourth Republic and if anything, the February 25 2023 election referred to, has the least litigation since 1999,” APC added.
It further argued that live broadcast “will subject the proceedings of the court to unnecessary sensationalism and undue social media trial, which distracts from the kernel of the serious business before the court.”
Continuing its argument against the application, APC, averred that allowing live televising of the proceedings, “will defeat the protection afforded to witnesses, expose them to avoidable censure and put them in a precarious situation.
“Televising of election tribunal proceedings (live) will only cause unnecessary tension, violence and unrest among the public, which may lead to breach of peace”, APC added, even as it urged the court to dismiss the application in the interest of justice.
INEC equally opposed live broadcast of the proceedings.
The Vanguard
President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio has dismissed calls for President Bola Tinubu to hand over power to Vice President Kashim Shettima, saying there is no leadership vacuum despite the President’s continued working vacation abroad.
Speaking on Tuesday, in Akwa Ibom State, while commissioning road projects executed by Governor Umo Eno, Akpabio addressed public concern over Tinubu’s three-week holiday, which was recently extended by one week. He insisted the President remains fully in office and continues to carry out his constitutional duties.
“I am the Senate President, and I am not the acting President of Nigeria, because President Tinubu is still in power. He is on a working leave, and there is no absence in Aso Rock. The world is a global village, and one can give instructions over the internet. So, why are people complaining?” he retorted.
Akpabio emphasized that only his office can declare a presidential vacancy and that no such condition currently exists. “Right now, there is no vacancy. Asiwaju Tinubu is still in power, and he is still running the affairs of Nigeria,” he added.
To underscore the President’s continued engagement, Akpabio disclosed of recent diplomatic contacts, including communications with French President Emmanuel Macron.
His remarks may have finally put to bed, unnecessary concerns raised by critics who claim the extended absence has hindered governance. Invoking modern communication, Akpabio argued a “remote” presidency can still function effectively.
The Presidency has not provided a formal return date for President Tinubu. Akpabio’s comments, however, signal a united stance within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) aimed at quelling speculation about a leadership crisis.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has asked the Presidency and the National Assembly to clarify who is constitutionally exercising the powers of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu following the expiration of the 21-day period announced for the President’s annual vacation.
Recall that Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30 for a three-week annual vacation in Europe. The President’s absence coincided with Vice President Kashim Shettima’s official engagements outside the country, including his current representation of Nigeria at the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York.
In a personally signed statement on Monday, Atiku argued that the expiration of the 21-day period had raised questions under Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution regarding the transfer of presidential powers.
Section 145(1) provides for the President to transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives when proceeding on vacation extending beyond a specified period or when otherwise unable to perform the functions of his office.
Atiku said Nigerians had not been shown any such declaration transferring presidential functions to Shettima.
“President Tinubu left Nigeria on 30 August. The Presidency publicly announced a three-week vacation. Yet, to date, Nigerians have not been shown any constitutional letter transmitting presidential authority to Vice President Kashim Shettima.
“The 21 days have now elapsed. If such a letter exists, the Presidency should publish it immediately,” Atiku said.
The 2027 African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, said the constitutional provision also addresses a situation where the President fails to transmit the required declaration.
He referred to Section 145(2), which provides that where the President is unable or fails to transmit the declaration within 21 days, the National Assembly can, by a simple majority in each chamber, mandate the Vice President to perform the functions of President as Acting President.
Atiku therefore asked the National Assembly to explain whether the constitutional procedure had been activated.
“If it does not, then the constitutional mechanism contemplated by Section 145(2) has been triggered, and the National Assembly owes Nigerians an explanation as to why it has not acted.
“This is not a matter of political convenience. It is a matter of constitutional order,” he said.
Atiku further drew attention to Shettima’s presence in New York, where he is leading Nigeria’s delegation to the 81st United Nations General Assembly based on the President’s directive.
Atiku said the situation raised a question about who was exercising presidential authority in Nigeria and under what constitutional instrument.
“So again: who is exercising presidential authority in Nigeria today, and under what constitutional instrument?” he asked.
The former Vice President also criticised what he described as reliance on informal indications of presidential activity while the President remains abroad.
“Nigeria cannot be governed by assumptions. It cannot be governed by presidential social-media posts from Europe.
“It cannot be governed by photographs from private dinners at the Élysée Palace.
“It cannot be governed on autopilot,” he said.
Atiku also said President Tinubu should be in the country at a time like this, linking his concerns to recent domestic developments in the country, including the deaths of 37 Nigerians in the custody of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps in Minna.
He said the incident had led to investigations, suspensions and calls for independent scrutiny.
He also raised concerns about petrol prices, claiming that the product was selling for as much as ₦1,500 per litre in some parts of the country.
“These are not ordinary times. Yet the President is abroad. The Vice President is abroad.
“The Senate President is abroad. And Nigerians have not been told, in the clear constitutional language required of a serious democracy, who is exercising the powers of the President,” Atiku said.
Atiku acknowledged the diplomatic significance of Tinubu’s private dinner with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris but argued that Nigeria’s governance responsibilities could not be suspended while the President was abroad.
“President Tinubu’s private dinner with President Emmanuel Macron in Paris may serve diplomatic purposes. But Nigeria itself cannot be placed on vacation.
“The Constitution does not recognise a ‘working vacation’ as an alternative system of presidential succession.
“It provides a procedure. That procedure must be obeyed,” he argued.
Atiku consequently called on the Presidency to disclose whether Tinubu transmitted the declaration required under Section 145(1) before leaving Nigeria.
He also asked the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives to state whether they received such a communication.
“If no declaration was transmitted within the constitutionally stipulated period, the National Assembly must explain why the procedure provided by Section 145(2) has not been activated,” he said.
Atiku concluded that the issue was bigger than the President’s personal movements, arguing that Nigerians were entitled to know who was constitutionally responsible for the exercise of presidential powers.
“Nigeria is bigger than any President.
“At a time of severe economic hardship, rising energy costs, security challenges and the shocking deaths of citizens in government custody, the country deserves visible, accountable and constitutionally grounded leadership.
“The question will not disappear: Who, constitutionally, is in charge of Nigeria?” Atiku questioned.
President Bola Tinubu has celebrated his wife, Oluremi, on her 66th birthday, describing her as his “truest friend and confidante”.
In a birthday tribute to the First Lady on his verified X handle on Monday, Tinubu praised her patience, courage, compassion and unwavering support throughout their years together.
The President, who described Oluremi as the woman who had stood by him through different seasons of his life, said she had shared his burdens and provided counsel during difficult moments.
“Today, I celebrate the woman who has walked beside me with patience, grace and uncommon courage. Àwọn àgbà sọ pé, ‘Ìyàwó rere ni adé ọkọ rẹ̀.’ A good wife is her husband’s crown,” he said.
Tinubu said Oluremi had given practical meaning to the biblical description of a virtuous woman, adding that she had remained a source of strength and understanding to him.
“The burdens that were mine to bear often found their way onto your shoulders. The thoughts I could not put into words somehow found their way to you.
“In difficult times, when the future was uncertain, you stayed calm beside me and prayed with me,” he stated.
The President described the First Lady as his “truest friend and confidante”, saying she was never afraid to offer him honest counsel.
“I call you my truest friend and confidante because you speak the truth plainly, even on the days I would rather not hear it,” Tinubu said.
He also praised Oluremi for her role in raising their children and grandchildren, saying her values of faith and kindness had shaped the family.
“Our home bears the lasting imprint of your devotion. Our children and grandchildren have grown beneath the shelter of your prayers. They carry your values of faith and kindness wherever life takes them,” he said.
Tinubu also highlighted the First Lady’s humanitarian activities, recalling her work through the New Era Foundation and the Renewed Hope Initiative.
“Nigerians know you for your compassion, kindness, generosity of spirit and steadfast faith. I have watched you touch lives quietly and consistently, offering hope and support to those in need,” he said.
He added that her initiatives had supported young people, widows, elderly citizens and women farmers across the country.
“From the New Era Foundation during our years in the saddle in Lagos to the Renewed Hope Initiative today, your care has reached many young boys and girls, widows, elderly citizens, and women farmers across the country,” the President stated.
Tinubu also acknowledged Oluremi’s advocacy for people affected by tuberculosis and other diseases, describing her as a compassionate advocate and determined champion.
He said her compassion transcended ethnic, regional and religious boundaries.
“For you, compassion has never recognised the boundaries of tribe, region or religion,” he said.
Reflecting on their years together, Tinubu said their shared experiences, including difficult decisions and sacrifices, had strengthened their relationship.
“A long journey teaches a man the true value of a good partner. We have travelled a long road together. I think of the difficult decisions we talked through for hours and the sacrifices no one else saw.
“Laughter and prayer carried us through many of them,” he said.
The President said he would choose Oluremi again if given the opportunity to relive his life.
“If life returned me to the beginning, I would choose the same road that led me to you. Through every mile, my heart has always remained at home with you,” Tinubu said.
The President wished the First Lady many more years in good health and happiness.
“Happy 66th birthday, my darling Oluremi. I pray that God Almighty will grant you many more years in good health and joy,” he said.
