Court dismisses Atiku, Obi’s request for live telecast of proceedings

Advertisements
Advertisements

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja, yesterday, dismissed request by the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, and his Labour Party (LP) counterpart, Peter Obi, for live streaming of proceedings of their petition against the election and declaration of Bola Tinubu as winner of the February 25, 2023 presidential election.

The court, in a unanimous ruling delivered by its chairman, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani, dismissed the application for lacking merit, saying the request was novel but not supported by any law in the country.

Advertisements
Advertisements

Tsammani said the request was capable of turning the court to a stadium or market square, and that such must, for now, be disallowed. He held that live telecast of proceedings would not add value to the petition.

The duo, through their lead lawyers, Chris Uche, SAN, and Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, maintained that the petition they lodged, querying declaration of the candidate of All Progressives Congress (APC), Bola Tinubu, as winner, was “a matter of monumental national concern and public interest.”

Advertisements

They argued that the case involved the interest of citizens and electorates in the 36 states of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory, who voted in the poll.

However, in separate processes they filed before the court, Tinubu and the APC urged the court to dismiss the application, which they described as an abuse of legal process.

Tinubu, in a counter-affidavit he filed alongside 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 it was only aimed at dissipating the judicial time of the court.

They stressed that Atiku failed to realise that the virtual court system adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic was backed by a practice direction administratively issued by the President of the Court of Appeal.

Meanwhile, Tinubu and APC expressed opposition towards attempt at consolidating three separate petitions that seek to nullify outcome of the presidential election.

Tinubu, represented by his team of lawyers, led by Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, argued that merging all the petitions would impede his ability to adequately defend against the allegations raised by the petitioners.

“In the interest of justice, this court should exercise restraint in granting the order for consolidation,” Tinubu pleaded, emphasising that the petitioners raised various issues against him and sought different reliefs.

Recall that the PEPC had expressed intention to consolidate all the petitions.

The panel cited Paragraph 50 of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, which grants it authority to merge and collectively determine petitions.

Consequently, the court granted permission for the petitioners’ counsel to consult their clients and report back with the outcome.

During subsequent proceedings, yesterday, Tinubu’s lawyer argued that the provision of the Electoral Act referred to by the court was not absolute.

He said: “There are issues raised in one petition that are not present in the others. The issues and evidentiary matters differ. It would be extremely difficult for us to consent to consolidation of the petitions.”

The court adjourned till today to present report on pre-hearing session in the petitions challenging Tinubu’s election.

Also, the Supreme Court fixed May 26 to deliver judgment in an appeal brought before it by the PDP, praying for the disqualification of Tinubu and Shettima.

The party, in the appeal, implored the apex court to reverse the decision of the intermediary court, led by Justice James Abundaga, which held that the party failed to establish its locus standi

Advertisements