By Jude Opara, Abuja

Three Presiding Officers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) yesterday told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that the refusal of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) to transmit the presidential election results on Election Day frustrated their jobs.

The Officers admitted that the results of the Senate and the House of Representatives election were transmitted unhindered and that the problems of technical hitches arose at the point of transmitting only the presidential poll results.

Testifying on Subpoena at the ongoing hearing of petitions challenging the outcome of the February 25 presidential election, the three witnesses admitted that the election process went well until the period the BVAS machines refused to work.

The three witnesses are Janet Nuhu Turaki, Christopher Bulus Ardo and Victoria Sani, who served as INEC Presiding Officers at Yobe, Bauchi and Katsina States respectively.

They had been summoned by the Court through the joint application of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Abubakar Atiku to appear before it and give accounts of their experiences in relation to results transmission during the last presidential election.

Janet Turaki who first testified in the petition filed by former Vice President Abubakar Atiku against the election said the accreditation of voters was successful but the process became frustrating at the point of uploading of the election results.

She emphasized that while the results of the National Assembly election sailed smoothly, that of the presidential poll failed and refused to work throughout the day.

The witness, however, informed the Court that the collated results in the forms EC8A were signed by the party agents and herself as INEC’s Presiding Officer.

In his evidence, Christopher Bulus Ardo told the court that he felt unfulfilled in his assignment with INEC on the election because he could not transmit the presidential election results as required by law.

In her own, Victoria Sani said she could not remember the candidate that won the presidential poll in Katsina State but insisted that all did not end well due to the inability to transmit the presidential aspect of the February 25 election.

Monday’s proceedings were conducted by Eyitayo Jegede SAN for Abubakar Atiku and PDP as petitioners, Abubakar Mahmoud SAN for INEC, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Charles Edosomwen SAN for the All Progressives Congress APC.

Meanwhile, the Presiding Justice of the Court, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani has fixed June 20 for the continuation of hearing in the petition.

Tribunal Rejects Tinubu, APC Bid to Stop APM Petition

An attempt by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) to stop the Allied People’s Movement (APM) in its petition challenging his qualification for the February 25, 2023, presidential election was yesterday rejected by the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

Tinubu, through his lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, had sought to use a Supreme Court judgment delivered on May 26, 2023, to terminate the APM’s petition, but the request was turned down.

The grouse of Tinubu was that the Apex Court had resolved the sole issue raised in the petition of the APM in the judgment in a suit filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

He sought to move the Court to invoke the spirit and letters of the Supreme Court judgment to halt the hearing into the APM’s petition.

The Presiding Justice of the Court, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani, however, disagreed with Tinubu and held that the party cannot be shut out in the face of fair hearing.

Justice Tsammani asked Tinubu to keep his objections against the hearing of the petition to the final address stage of the court’s proceedings.

Similar objections raised by APC through its counsel, Charles Edosomwen SAN, against the petition on the same ground were turned down by PEPC for the same reason.

Earlier, the APM, through its lawyer, Mr Gideon Ijiagbonya, had informed the Court of receipt of the Supreme Court judgment being sought to be used to terminate its petition.

The lawyer said that upon perusal of the judgment by the Supreme Court, he and his legal team concluded that there is life in the petition and applied for its hearing.

He, however, sought adjournment till June 26 to enable him to obtain a vital document from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to establish his case.

Justice Tsammani, in a brief ruling, rejected a week-long adjournment and fixed Wednesday, June 21, for the hearing of the petition.

Group Backs INEC Chairman over Conduct of 2023 Elections

In response to the barrage of criticisms that trailed the conduct of the 2023 general elections, a group under the auspices of Nigeria Youth Network for Good Governance and Sustainable Democracy has come to the defence of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Mahmood Yakubu.

Many analysts have called out the INEC Chairman following the inability of the Commission to have posted election results real time using the Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BIVAS), which is contrary to the numerous assurances given by Prof. Yakubu before the election.

In a statement entitled, 2023 General Election: Unwarranted Attacks on INEC Chairman and made available to newsmen on Monday in Abuja, the group fingered the opposition Labour Party (LP) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as having intensified the attacks on the INEC Chairman.

Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the group, Constantine Ikechukwu who signed the statement further alleged that the action of the two political parties and their supporters is capable of unsettling the peace of the nation.

“We have watched, with great concern, the unfolding events, and an apparent desire of some enemies of progress to plunge Nigeria into chaos since the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) announced the results of the 2023 General Election.

“While the elections produced a President, Vice President, 28 State Governors (minus the six states where elections are off-season), 109 Senators and 360 Members of the House of Representatives, supporters of the Labour Party (LP) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have been inconsolable, employing both conventional and unorthodox means to prove that the 2023 Presidential Election was rigged.

“While same, both parties have filed their respective petitions at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) which is currently sitting. One would have expected that as law abiding citizens seeking to truly serve the country, the Presidential candidates of the LP, PDP and their supporters would refrain from canvassing the issues raised in their petitions outside the Tribunal.

“Unfortunately, both the petitioners, their lawyers and supporters have continued to make disparaging remarks about the outcome of election in public. In fact, their lawyers, who are Learned Silks, have continued to make unsavory comments to the media about the outcome of the election which they are challenging. Besides, LP supporters, referred to as “Obidients” have turned the social media, especially Twitter, to a battleground where they abuse, curse, and denigrate anybody no matter how highly placed, that disagrees with their position. Supporters of the All Progressives Congress (APC) have sadly joined them in this spectacle of shame”.

The youth group also took a swipe at some foreign and local observer groups as well as the Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) who covered the election for their critical views about its conduct.

“Some foreign observers and local Civil Society Organizations (CSO’s) have also been making subjective and unsubstantiated comments about the election, even when none of them observed up to half of the 176,606 Polling Units where the election took place. Everything is beginning to look like a playbook.

“Also recently, Olisa Agbakoba, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, in a tweet, congratulated President Bola Tinubu on winning the election, but asked the President to sack the INEC Chairman that conducted the election. We consider his position as self-contradictory, dishonest, and patronizing. You cannot congratulate a man for winning an election and then ask him to sack the person that conducted the same election”.

The group further advised the LP and the PDP to wait for the outcome of the election petition which is currently pending at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal instead of engaging in what it described as self-help.

“The Federal Republic of Nigeria is greater than any individual or his ambition. In furtherance of our strong belief in one indivisible and prosperous Nigeria, we strongly condemn the continued disregard for the rule of law by the LP, PDP, and their supporters with their unmitigated and disparaging comments on the outcome of the 2023 Presidential Election even when the PEPT is busy hearing their petitions. You cannot seek redress in court and at the same time continue to resort to self-help. We regard the blitzkrieg method employed by the LP and PDP lawyers to use the media to convict INEC in the arena of public opinion as a disservice to the rule of law and the legal profession. We also strongly condemn the blatant threats being made by LP, PDP, their lawyers, and supporters against the Justices of the PEPT hearing the petition, to either give a judgement favourable to them or be damned.

“We also view the incessant virulent attacks on INEC and its Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu as condescending, emotive, subjective, and irrational. While we agree that the 2023 Presidential Election was not perfect, there is no concrete evidence to show that the INEC Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu rigged the election in favour of the APC as alleged or broke any electoral law.

“After a careful study of the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act 2022, we are convinced that in declaring Ahmed Bola Tinubu as President-Elect at the National Collation Centre, Prof. Yakubu only performed his statutory role and did not break any known law. On the contrary, he would have broken the law with serious consequences if he had failed to make that declaration. Thankfully, the law also gives aggrieved parties the opportunity to challenge the outcome of the election in court, which they have rightly done”.