The ruling of the supreme court on the appeals brought by the opposition PDP and Labour Party (LP) and their respective presidential candidates, Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, against Tinubu’s announcement by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the winner of the presidential election was criticized.
The opposition party claimed that the ruling went against specific clauses in the Electoral Act of 2022, the Guidelines and Regulations issued by INEC, and the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) Constitution.
According to a statement from the PDP’s national publicity secretary, Hon. Debo Ologunagba, most Nigerians are shocked, dissatisfied, and extremely worried about the Supreme Court’s reasoning.
The party claimed that the Supreme Court’s decision to disregard the law’s provisions is a somber indictment of Nigeria’s democracy.
Instead, it dashed the hopes of most Nigerians who looked to it as a Temple of Impartiality to provide significant justice in the case in light of the relevant laws and facts.
The people of Nigeria sincerely anticipated that the Supreme Court would defend and uphold the explicit provisions of the 1999 Constitution regarding the qualifications and minimal requirements for a winner to be declared in a presidential election in Nigeria, particularly in relation to the mandatory 25% of votes in the Federal Capital Territory and issues of electoral rules and guidelines violation, blatant manipulations and alterations of election results by the APC.
“Nigerians are still perplexed as to how, on the basis of technicalities, the Supreme Court approved the grave crimes of forgery, deception, and perjury.”
The PDP claims that the general sadness, gloom, and sense of despair that pervaded the nation after the verdict was delivered is a concerning omen of impending dire consequences.
The party claimed that “this Supreme Court ruling has clearly shaken Nigerians’ confidence in the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court as the last hope of the common man.”
The Labour Party, for its part, urged the world community to support Nigerian democracy.
Barrister Julius Abure, national chairman of the LP, declared that the fight of Nigeria’s founding fathers had been destroyed.
Additionally, he reminded the Obidient Movement across the country that the fight for a new Nigeria was just getting started.
Attorney Abure called the Supreme Court’s decision “another sad day for Nigeria,” claiming that the court’s decision to render this decision tore apart the court’s fundamental principles of justice and morality.
“Despite all the problems with the ruling made by the Presidential Election Appeal Tribunal, we are really shocked and surprised that even the highest court will follow the precedent set by a previous ruling.
We are forced to move on after successfully exercising the fundamental rights that the laws of our country have granted us. Despite our disappointment and dismay at the exercise’s conclusion, we have decided to press on and maintain our optimism for the country’s future.
He said, “We grieve for our institutions because they are unable to step up and bravely stand up for democracy and the voices of our people.
Key Rulings from the Supreme Court
The ruling of the Presidential Election Petition Court , PEPC , was upheld by the Supreme Court, which also dismissed Atiku and Obi’s individual appeals.
The Supreme Court panel, presided over by Justice Inyang Okoro, denied Atiku’s request for permission to submit new evidence in his appeal against Tinubu’s election victory.
In his appeal, he asked the supreme court to allow him to introduce supplementary evidence in the form of sworn depositions from Chicago State University, specifically the certified discovery deposition given on October 3, 2023, by Caleb Westberg on behalf of Chicago State University, which refutes the certificate that Bola Ahmed Tinubu submitted to INEC.
The seven-member panel resolved all seven of the appellant’s issues in favor of President Tinubu, and they unanimously dismissed the appeal.
Atiku claimed that the election was invalid because the polling unit results were not uploaded to the IReV portal in a timely manner, in violation of the Electoral Act. However, the court rejected this claim.
This argument was rejected by the court, which stated that since IReV was not a result coalition platform, the election could not have been declared void for lack of results upload.
The court further decided that Tinubu’s election victory was unaffected by his inability to receive 25% of the vote in the Federal Capital Territory , FCT ,despite having the necessary 25% of the vote in over 24 states.
The court further declared that Atiku had not produced any evidence to support his claims of widespread election tampering or his victory.
“Aside from the numbers released by INEC announcing Tinubu, the second respondent, as the election’s victor, I am unable to locate any figures presented by the appellant indicating that he received the majority of the votes.
Justice Okoro declared, “The votes in front of us demonstrate that the second respondent Tinubu won the election.”
Regarding the question of whether the lower court had been biased against the appellant despite their attorneys’ claims to the contrary, Mr. Okoro stated that “the words of the court were not meant to disparage the appellant.”
“Overall, after addressing every point raised against the petitioner, I conclude that this appeal lacks merit and is consequently dismissed,” the court declared.
The court had earlier denied Atiku’s request to present new proof of certificate forgery against President Tinubu.
Atiku requested the admission of a deposition given by Chicago State University’s registrar in the new evidence.
Following his triumph in a US court case, wherein the university was mandated to provide Tinubu’s academic records to Atiku, he was able to obtain the document.
The court lacked jurisdiction, according to Justice Okoro, to consider such evidence that had not been presented to the lower court.
He claimed that Atiku’s attorneys failed to get the evidence and submit it on time to the lower court.
According to the ruling of the court, Atiku’s petition contesting Tinubu’s election had already expired when he brought the document to the Presidential Election Petition Court. He continued by saying that the evidence that the lower court refused to acknowledge and consider was not subject to acceptance or action by the Supreme Court.
He wondered why Atiku sought to tender the fresh evidence when the grounds of his appeal did not raise the issue of certificate forgery against the president.
Governors, Buhari, and More Applaud President for Judgment
As for Tinubu’s predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari, he and the majority of the populace have welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision to reject Atiku and Obi’s appeals.
He reiterated his remarks from the September 6 ruling of the Presidential Election Petition Court, which upheld President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s victory, in a statement released by his media assistant, Garba Shehu. She said that the decision is “a reaffirmation of the will of the majority of the people against the determined will of a hard-fighting minority.”
“The country deserves a break now that we have reached the final bus stop following an arduous eight-month costly legal journey.” He declared, “The opposition has put up a strong fight.”
Godswill Akpabio, the president of the Senate, commended Tinubu on the court’s validation of his win.
In a letter of congratulations to President Tinubu, Akpabio stated that the ruling of the supreme court was a relief to behold since it finally loosens the last barriers to the socio-political engineering route that the president had pledged to the country.
“Mr President, I am personally elated that the jurists of the Supreme Court saw through the arguments and even without much technicalities easily confirmed your victory in the poll,” he said.
The chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, NGF, and Kwara State governor, AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq also congratulated Tinubu on the affirmation of his electoral victory by the Supreme Court.
AbdulRazaq, in a statement signed by his chief press secretary, Rafiu Ajakaye, said the Supreme Court’s judgement was a testament to the fact that the February 25, 2023 presidential election represented the wishes of the largest majority of Nigerians that voted during the election.
On his part, Niger State Governor Mohammed Umaru Bago said the judgement was a demonstration of truth and justice
He said with the verdict, “the coast is finally cleared and arguments laid to rest.”
Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu and his Kogi State counterpart Yahaya Bello also lauded the Supreme Court judgement.
According to Sanwo-Olu, the ruling reached by the nation’s highest court, in which all seven justices concurred, represents a single voice that cuts over disagreements.
According to Kogi State Governor Bello, the ruling of the Supreme Court has validated the election’s fairness and transparency and enhanced Nigeria’s body of legal precedent.
He urged the opposition to back the government and praised the Independent National Electoral Commission , INEC , for its careful work.
Femi Gbajabiama, the president’s chief of staff, stated: “Like the judge said, all litigations must come to an end.” They addressed all the issues—roughly seven of them—and, in my opinion, the rulings on each of those issues were unquestionably sound.
Festus Keyamo, the minister of aviation, stated that social media cannot be used to win legal battles.
“The general public browsing social media can now plainly see that there is a significant gap between feelings and the law thanks to the Supreme Court’s decision today. The majority of those involved pursued these election petitions with needless venom and hatred, he claimed.
Senior Attorneys Respond
Regarding the matter of election litigation, human rights attorney Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN) characterized the ruling of the supreme court as sound in law and by the pertinent statutes.
But in order to change the Election Act of 2022, Adegboruwa urged the National Assembly to form a special committee to examine the rulings of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal.
Adegboruwa questioned, “Given that INEC is still occupied with promising Nigerians that results of upcoming elections will be sent electronically, what then is the penalty for the electoral umpire that failed them upon its voluntary undertaking?
Wahab Shittu, SAN , for his part, stated that the ruling was a success for constitutionalism, democracy, and the rule of law, as well as for President Tinubu and the integrity of the electoral process.
Gbenga Ojo, a law professor, added that the Supreme Court’s ruling is representative of the law.
Ojo added that the appellate courts mostly rely on the testimony provided or the documents filed before the lower courts, comparing the PDP candidate’s attempt to introduce new evidence to closing the stable after the animal has run away.
The parties and the appellate courts are bound by the lower court’s records of proceedings. No party will be permitted to “smuggle” new documents or evidence.
Crediblenews.ng
