Headlines
Tribunal Declares Atiku’s Evidence As Drop in the Ocean, Affirms Buhari as Duly Elected
The Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal in Abuja on Wednesday dismissed the petition filed by the Peoples Democratic Party and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, challenging the victory of President Muhammadu Buhari at the February 23, 2019 election.
The five-man bench led by Justice Mohammed Garba unanimously dismissed the case for lacking in merit after resolving all the five issues raised in the case against the petitioners.
Justice Garba, who read the lead judgment, resolved all the five broad issues raised by the petitioners in favour of the respondents.He held that none of the grounds on which the petition was anchored was proved.
Comparing the evidence led by the petitioners to the quantum of their allegations, Justice Garba said, “It is like a drop in the ocean”.
He ruled, “In the final result, I have come to the conclusion, which is inevitable and unavoidable, that the petitioners have not discharged the burden of proof required of any of the grounds of the petition in paragraph 15 of the petition.This petition is accordingly and hereby dismissed in its entirety.”
The tribunal held, among others, that contrary to the contention of the petitioners, Buhari had the educational qualification to contest the presidential election.
It held that the petitioners failed to provide any proof that Buhari did not attend the Provincial Secondary School, Katsina and obtained his West African School Certificate from there in 1961.
“It is established that a candidate is not required under the Electoral Act to attach his certificate to Form CF001 before the candidate is adjudged to have the requisite qualification to contest the election,” Justice Garba said.
Citing a previous Supreme Court judgment, the tribunal said, “Submission of educational certificate is not a requirement to contest election.
“In effect, the 2nd defendant (Buhari) went through secondary education and then proceeded to military school. The military school is higher than secondary education.”
Justice Garba also referred to a statement issued in 2015 by the then Director of Army’s Public Relations, Brigadier-General Olajide Laleye, denying that Buhari’s certificate was with the Army’s board.
According to the judge, the denial by Laleye was only to the effect that Buhari’s certificate was not in his personal file but not to the effect that he did not have a certificate.
He pointed out that from Laleye’s statement the Army had verified Buhari’s results at the point of his enrolment into the Army in 1961.
He said Laleye admitted that Buhari possessed some credits and a pass in his West African School Certificate which qualified him to be commissioned into the Nigerian Army.
He said Buhari’s results mentioned in Laleye’s statement must have been copied from Buhari’s Form 99A submitted to the Army Board at the point of his enrolment into the Nigerian Army in 1962.
Justice Garba held, “The 2nd defendant is not only qualified, but also eminently qualified to contest the February 23, 2019 presidential election,” adding, “The fact that he did not attach his certificate cannot lead to the conclusion that he is not educated up to secondary education.”
The tribunal also dismissed the claim of the petitioners that Provincial Secondary School, Katsina, was not in existence as of 1961 when Buhari claimed to have obtained his West African School Certificate from there.
He ruled, “There is no scintilla of evidence that the school stated in Form CF001 submitted to INEC was not in existence as of that time.
“They have failed to discharge the burden of proof of the allegations of non-qualification or submission of false information which is fundamental in the aid of the qualification of the 2nd defendant to contest the election.”
Justice Garba added, “The onus rests squarely on the petitioners to prove their assertion that the 2nd respondent does not possess the educational qualification to contest the election or that he submitted false information which is fundamental in nature to aid his qualification. This, I have mentioned, that the petitioners failed to prove. The petitioners cannot therefore rely on any failure in the case of the respondents.
“I also have no doubt in my mind that the petitioners have failed to prove that the 2nd respondent does not possess the qualification to contest the election into the office of the President as stipulated in sections 131, 137, 138 of the Constitution.
“I am also of the firm view that the petitioners have failed to prove that the 2nd respondent submitted false information which is fundamental in nature to aid his qualification to contest the election into the Office of the President as prescribed in section 35(1) of the Evidence Act, 2011.”
The tribunal also ruled that the election manual issued by INEC for the conduct of the 2019 presidential election did not provide for electronic transmission of results of the election.
It added that the petitioners failed to prove that election results were transmitted electronically.
It added that petitioners’ Witness 59, David Njorga, from Kenya, did not qualify to be referred to as an expert witness, as he only relied on third party information to make a case for the existence of a server into which the results of the election were allegedly transmitted.
The tribunal held that Njorga relied on hearsay information posted on a website, www.factsdontlie.com, by a purported whistleblower who was never known.
It added that card reader was not used to transmit results during the election but was for mere authentication of ownership of voter cards.
It added that the petitioners merely dumped documents particularly result sheets and voter register on the tribunal without demonstrating them by attaching the evidence of any of their 62 witnesses to the documents in their bid to prove the allegations in their petition.
It held that none of the documents tendered by the petitioners was utilised to prove the allegations, such as over-voting or non-accreditation of voters.
Other members of the panel, Justices Abdul Aboki, Joseph Ikyegh, Samuel Oseji and Peter Ige concurred with the ruling.
The judgment, which lasted over eight hours on Wednesday, started at 9.30am and ended at about 5.58pm when the other members of the panel delivered their supporting opinions.
The Punch
Former Senate President, Bukola Saraki, has said that the senate is an institution that needs to be protected, not an individual.
This was revealed on his X handle on Saturday in the aftermath of the ongoing backlash of the allegation of sexual harassment made by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan on Arise TV in an interview against Senate President, Godswill Apkabio.
Akpabio’s wife filed a lawsuit against Senator Natasha at the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Abuja over alleged defamation and violation of her husband’s fundamental human rights.
Saraki expressed sadness over the development as he stated that the incident is already hurting the integrity, sanctity, image and public perception of the Senate as an institution.
“I believe that every person who has had anything to do with the National Assembly, particularly as a leader, member and worker should always jealously protect these values which make the institution, the numero uno among the three arms of government,” he said.
Saraki urged the two parties to sheath their swords and warned that supporters of both parties should be mindful of the impacts of their actions.
He advised that the instruments of law and parliamentary conventions should be adhered to in resolving the issue on the ground. He also called for an investigation of the matter by the Senate Committee on Ethics.
“At this point, with the public claims made by the Senator, the right measure to take is to institute an open, transparent and honest investigation by the Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions,” he said.
“Both parties must submit to the investigation, fully cooperate with the committee, and stake their claims before it. This is not the first time a Senate President would appear before the Committee to aid it in the conduct of a transparent and open investigation.
“For me, the institution of the Senate is so important, sacred, and pre-eminent. All lovers of democracy should always work to strengthen it. No leader or member should be allowed to openly or surreptitiously work to subvert its sanctity.”
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has called for a thorough and impartial investigation into the explosive allegations of sexual harassment, intimidation, and mistreatment levelled against Senate President Godswill Akpabio, by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
In a statement shared on his official Twitter handle on Friday, Atiku stressed that the gravity of these claims demands immediate and transparent action.
“Like millions of Nigerians, I watched with deep concern this morning as Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan raised serious allegations of sexual harassment, intimidation, and mistreatment against the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio,” Atiku said.
He talked about the need for a credible investigation to protect the integrity of the Nigerian Senate and uphold the values of justice and accountability.
“These allegations are grave and deserve a thorough, impartial, and transparent investigation,” he stated.
Atiku reminded Nigerians that the Senate, as the legislative arm of government, represents the people’s voice.
“For that reason, its leaders must embody integrity and respect for the offices they hold.
“As the third most powerful figure in the country, the Senate President should embody unimpeachable character,” he added.
Beyond the political implications, Atiku highlighted the far-reaching impact of sexual harassment on women’s participation in governance and national development.
“Sexual harassment in the workplace is a significant barrier to women’s advancement and, by extension, the nation’s progress. Allegations of such misconduct should never be simply dismissed, particularly when they involve a public officer with immense power, influence, and responsibility,” he said.
Atiku warned that how this case is handled will send a strong message about Nigeria’s commitment to justice, fairness, and gender equality.
The former VP also pointed out the urgent need to create a safe and supportive environment for female legislators, especially given their underrepresentation in the Senate.
“With only four women currently serving in the Senate, it is imperative that we foster an environment where female legislators can serve without fear of harassment or intimidation,” he said.
The allegations by Akpoti-Uduaghan have sparked widespread reactions across the country, with civil society organizations and gender rights advocates demanding swift and decisive action.
Headlines
Abiola Cannot Be Recognised As Former President; He Was Never Sworn-in – Gen Ishola Williams
By Eric Elezuo
One of the prime actors of the June 12, 1993 incidents, General Ishola Williams, has said that much as Chief MKO Abiola wrong was created having won the election, and denied victory, he cannot be recognized as a former President of Nigeria.
Gen Williams made his revelation while speaking as a guest on Channels television socio-political programme, Inside Source.
He maintained that only those who were sworn in that recognised as former presidents, and Abiola was never sworn in.
“Abiola cannot be recognised as former president because he was never sworn in.
The General, who said that he resigned from the army as a result of the wholesome reception given to General Sani Abacha, when he overthrew Chief Ernest Shonekan-led Interim National Government, contrary to expectation, also picked flaws in the narratives given by former Military President Ibrahim Babangida, in his recently launched book, A Journey In Service.
Williams rose in the army to become the Commandant of Army Signals, Commander of Training and Doctrine (TRADOC) and Chief of Defence Training and Planning, from where he resigned.
