Politics
Obi, LP’s Petition Frivolous, Lacks Merit, APC Tells Tribunal
The All Progressives Congress (APC), on Monday, asked the presidential election petition tribunal to dismiss the Labour Party and its presidential candidate Peter Obi’s petition against President-elect, Bola Tinubu.
The APC, the fourth respondent, urged the tribunal to reject the petition in its notice of preliminary objection marked CA/PEPC/03/2023 and filed at the tribunal’s secretariat Monday night by Thomas Ojo, a member of the party’s legal team led by Lateef Fagbemi, in Abuja.
The party asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost because it lacked merit and was frivolous.
Mr Obi, the first petitioner, and Labour Party, the second petitioner, had sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr Tinubu, Vice-President-elect Kashim Shettima and APC as first to fourth respondents, respectively.
The petitioners are seeking the nullification of the election victory of Messrs Tinubu and Shettima in the February 25 presidential election.
While former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) came second with 6,984,520 votes in the election, Mr Obi came third with 6,101,533 votes.
Alhaji Abubakar and PDP are also challenging the outcome of the poll.
However, in the petition marked CA/PEPC/03/2023 filed by Mr Obi and Labour Party’s lead counsel, Livy Ozoukwu, they contended that Mr Tinubu “was not duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the time of the election.” The petitioners claimed there was rigging in 11 states.
Mr Obi and his party claimed that INEC violated its regulations when it announced the results even though the total polling unit results had not been fully scanned, uploaded and transmitted electronically as required by the Electoral Act.
Among other prayers, the petitioners urged the tribunal to “determine that, at the time of the presidential election held on February 25, 2023, the second and third respondents (Messrs Tinubu and Shettima) were not qualified to contest the election.
“That it be determined that all the votes recorded for the second respondent in the election are wasted votes, owing to the non-qualification of the second and third respondents. That it be determined that on the basis of the remaining votes (after discountenancing the votes credited to the second respondent), the first petitioner (Mr Obi) scored a majority of the lawful votes cast at the election and had not less than 25 per cent of the votes cast in each of at least two-thirds of the states of the federation and the FCT and satisfied the constitutional requirements to be declared the winner of the February 25 presidential election,” stated the petition.
It asked the tribunal to determine that Mr Tinubu, “having failed to score one-quarter of the votes cast at the presidential election in the FCT, was not entitled to be declared and returned as the winner of the presidential election held on February 25.”
Responding, the APC urged the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that Mr Obi, the first petitioner, lacked requisite locus standi to institute the petition because he was not a member of the Labour Party at least 30 days to the party’s presidential primary to be validly sponsored by the party.
“The first petitioner (Mr Obi) was a member of PDP until May 24, 2022. The first petitioner was screened as a presidential aspirant of the PDP in April 2022. The first petitioner participated and was cleared to contest the presidential election while being a member of the PDP,” APC argued.
“First petitioner purportedly resigned his membership of PDP on May 24, 2022, to purportedly join the 2nd petitioner (Labour Party) on May 27, 2022.”
It alleged that Labour Party, the second petitioner, “conducted its presidential primary on May 30, 2022, which purportedly produced the first petitioner as its candidate, which time contravened Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act for him to contest the primary election as a member of the second petitioner.”
APC argued that Mr Obi was not a member of the Labour Party as of the time of his alleged sponsorship, arguing that “by the mandatory provisions of Section 77 (1) (2) and (3) of the Electoral Act 2022, a political party shall maintain a register and shall make such register available to INEC not later than 30 days before the date fixed for the party primaries, congresses and convention.”
It stated further that all the PDP’s presidential candidates were screened on April 29, 2022, an exercise in which Mr Obi participated and was cleared to contest while a party member.
According to APC, Mr Obi and Labour’s petition was incompetent since Mr Obi’s name could not have been in the party’s register made available to INEC when he joined the party.
The APC argued that the petition was improperly constituted, having failed to join Mr Abubakar and PDP.
“By Paragraph 17 of the petition, the petitioners, on their own, stated that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar came second in the presidential election with 6,984,520 votes as against the petitioners who came third with 6,101,533 votes; at Paragraph 102 (iti) of the petition, the petitioners urged the tribunal to determine that 1st petitioner scored the majority of lawful votes without joining Alhaji Atiku Abubakar in the petition,” the APC stated.
It added, “For the tribunal to grant prayer (iii) of the petitioners, the tribunal must have set aside the scores and election of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar must be heard before his votes can be discountenanced by the tribunal.”
The party said the petition and the identified paragraphs were in breach of the mandatory provisions of Paragraph 4(1)(D) of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022.
According to APC, paragraphs 60 — 77 of the petition are non-specific, vague and/or nebulous and thereby incompetent contrary to paragraph 4(1)(d) of the Ist Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022.
It said the allegations of non-compliance must be made distinctly and proved on a polling unit basis, but none was specified or provided in any of the paragraphs of the petition.
“Paragraphs 59-60 of the petition disclose no identity or particulars of scores and polling units supplied in 18,088 units mentioned therein,” it added.
The party, therefore, argued that the tribunal lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain pre-election complaints embedded in the petition as presently constituted, among other arguments. The APC urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost as it is devoid of any merit and founded on frivolity.
On Wednesday, the House of Representatives passed, through a second reading, a bill seeking to retain immunity for the Office of the President and remove immunity from the Vice President, the Governors and the Deputy Governors.
The bill was one of the 42 considered and passed through the second reading stage during plenary presided over by the Deputy Speaker, Mr Benjamin Kalu, in Abuja.
Sponsored by Hon. Solomon Bob (Rivers PDP), the bill is seeking the amendment of Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution to guard against abuse of office and to ensure transparency in governance.
The long title of the proposed legislation read: “A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to qualify the immunity conferred on the President, remove the immunity conferred on the Vice President, the Governors and their deputies, in order to curb corruption, eradicate impunity and enhance accountability in public office and for related matters.”
Key amendments include changes to Section 308 of the Constitution, which currently grants immunity to the president, vice president, governors, and deputy governors while in office.
The proposed bill will amend subsection 3 to ensure that immunity only applies to the President and the vice president when acting as President under Section 145 of the Constitution.
Additionally, a new subsection 4 will be introduced to make the immunity clause inapplicable if the office holder is acting in an unofficial capacity, engaging in actions beyond the powers of the office, or involved in criminal conduct.
“The bill seeks to foster transparency and strengthen the fight against corruption by making public officials more accountable for their actions, both in and out of office.”
“Section 308 of the principal Act is amended by:(a) substituting a new subsection (3) as follows: “(3) This section applies to a person holding the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Vice President only when acting as President, in line with Section 145 of this Constitution.
Creating sub section (4) thereto as follows:”(4) The foregoing provisions of this section shall be inapplicable where the person to whom this section applies is acting in an unofficial capacity or where the conduct of the person is beyond the powers of his office or the conduct is criminal in nature.
“This Bill may be cited as the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Alteration) Act 2024.
The bill is currently awaiting further debate and consideration by the National Assembly.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has written to notify Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the senator representing Kogi Central, about the petition by constituents seeking her recall from the national assembly.
INEC said it has also received the contact details of the petitioners.
“Pursuant to section 69 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended, I write to notify you of the receipt of a petition from representatives of registered voters in your constituency seeking your recall from the senate.
“The notification is in line with the provisions of clause 2 (a) of the Commission’s Regulations and Guidelines for Recall 2024.
“This letter is also copied to the presiding officer of the senate and simultaneously published on the commission’s website. Thank you”, the letter read.
The letter was signed by Ruth Oriaran Anthony, secretary to the commission.
Meanwhile, in a statement issued on Wednesday, INEC said it has now received the updated contact details from representatives of petitioners seeking to recall the senator.
In the statement, Sam Olumekun, INEC’s National Commissioner and Chairman of Information and Voter Education, said a letter notifying the senator of the petition has been delivered to her official address, copied to the senate presiding officer, and published on the commission’s website.
“The next step is to scrutinise the list of signatories submitted by the petitioners to ascertain that the petition is signed by more than one half (over 50%) of the registered voters in the constituency. This will be done in the coming days.
“The outcome, which will be made public, shall determine the next step to be taken by the Commission. We once again reassure Nigerians that the process will be open and transparent”, Mr Olumekun said.
Sen. Akpoti-Uduaghan had recently accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexually harassing her.
The allegation came in the wake of seating arrangement related altercation between Senator. Akpabio and the Kogi Central senator at the red chamber
She was subsequently suspended from the senate for six months for “gross misconduct” over the incident.
The constituents behind the recall move also accused her of “gross misconduct, abuse of office, and deceitful behaviour”.
The senator has denied wrongdoing and called the recall effort a “coordinated suppression” of her voice.
The House of Representatives on Wednesday passed the second reading of a bill to upgrade the Lagos State 37 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) to full-fledged Local Government Areas (LGAs ).
The bill, was sponsored by James Faleke, Babajimi Benson, Enitan Badru, and 19 other lawmakers.
The bill is titled “A Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) to Accommodate the Thirty-Seven (37) Development Area Councils of Lagos State as Full-Fledged Local Government Areas, Increasing the Total Number of Local Government Areas in the Federation to Eight Hundred and Eleven (811), and for Related Matters (HB. 1498),”
Once fully enacted, Nigeria’s total number of LGAs will rise from 774 to 811, with Lagos overtaking Kano and Katsina, which currently have 44 and 34 LGAs, respectively.
Proponents of the bill argue that granting full LGA status to the LCDAs would bring governance closer to the people. The 37 LCDAs were created by President Bola Tinubu in 2003 when he was governor of Lagos State.
However, it’s worth noting that the Lagos State House of Assembly has been working on a bill to replace the 37 LCDAs with newly designated administrative areas.