Why The Tribunal Judgement Is Unassailable, Thorough, Difficult To Overturn – SANs

Why The Tribunal Judgement Is Unassailable, Thorough, Difficult To Overturn – SANs

Following the verdict delivered by the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) on Wednesday, which addressed the petitions brought forth by Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi and the Labour Party (LP), as well as the Allied Peoples Movement (APM).

These petitions contested the declaration of Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the February 25 presidential election. Several Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) have expressed their appreciation for the court’s decision.

In their reactions, these senior lawyers praised the tribunal’s rulings as accurate and in harmony with the legal principles that govern election litigations in Nigeria.

Read Also Peter Obi Had A Meeting With Tinubu? – Fact Emerge

They acknowledged the meticulousness and professionalism displayed by the five-member bench, led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, in their interpretation of the law.

Dr. Joseph Nwobike (SAN) lauded the PEPT’s judgment, affirming that it adhered to established legal principles concerning election disputes. He emphasized that the tribunal thoroughly examined and resolved all legal and factual issues in favor of the respondents, considering the evidence presented and the applicable laws.

He pointed out that the decision affirmed the eligibility of the second respondent to contest the presidential election and clarified that a court order for forfeiture in the United States did not constitute a conviction under the Nigerian Constitution.

The tribunal also ruled that the petitioners failed to prove the alleged U.S. conviction of the President and that INEC had discretion in transmitting election results. Nwobike concluded by encouraging dissatisfied parties to seek recourse in the Supreme Court.

Chief Robert Clarke (SAN), an experienced lawyer who has witnessed numerous tribunals throughout his career, hailed the judgment as the best the country has ever seen. In response to concerns raised by the Labour Party counsel about the state of electoral jurisprudence in Nigeria, Clarke expressed his disagreement and asserted that the judgments had significantly enriched the country’s legal framework. He emphasized the importance of strong pleadings in legal cases, particularly highlighting issues with the pleadings in Atiku’s case.

Chief Yomi Alliyu (SAN) commended the judges for their thoroughness and professionalism, noting that the judgment was meticulous and well-reasoned. He also pointed out the exceptional dedication shown by the judges in delivering the verdict, even in the face of attempts to intimidate and threaten them.

Dave Ajetomobi, a former chairman of Ikeja NBA, believed that the judges had taken their time to thoroughly examine the cases, given the heightened expectations and social media commentary surrounding the trial. He commended their efforts and suggested that the Supreme Court might face challenges overturning the lower court’s verdict.

Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN) viewed the verdict as expected, given the challenges of overturning election results in Nigeria’s legal system. He pointed out the burden placed on petitioners and the formidable nature of the task. Adegboruwa emphasized the need to focus on electoral reform, particularly reevaluating the independence and effectiveness of INEC. He concluded by urging all parties to abide by the legal processes defined for addressing grievances while also calling for an urgent overhaul of INEC.