[JUST IN] Presidential Election Tribunal: PDP expresses confidence in judiciary’s commitment to justice

The Peoples Democratic Party has expressed confidence in the ability of Justices serving on the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal ( PEPT), as well as the Nigerian Judiciary to ensure that justice is not only done but seen to have been done when a final verdict is delivered.

Director of Strategy and Research of the PDP Presidential Campaign Council, Pedro Obaseki, said this in an interview with Journalists, in Abuja, on Wednesday.

According to him, the party’s confidence is hinged on the fact that the judiciary was fully aware that a lot, including its integrity as an arm of government, is at stake.

He equally expressed optimism that the judges will summon the courage to deal with the issues, facts and evidence presented by the opposition parties in their various petitions challenging the results of the 2023 Presidential election as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC.

Obaseki noted that apart from PDP’s petition, the petition filed by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) seeking the nullification of President Bola Tinubu and Kashim Shetimma’s victory was worth mentioning because of the key issue bordering on the eligibility of the candidates of the All Progressives Congress,
APC , to contest the election in question in the first place.

He said, “ The first thing is eligibility, if ten people follow me to run a race I can begin to question who won, only if those ten people were qualified, that is what has been thrown up by the APM petition.

“It looked at whether Tinubu could have run for the polls, and if he could, was his nomination by his party valid. This is a constitutional problem, a question that the court must answer because it is the foundation of the entire race from the beginning.”

The presiding judge, Justice Haruna Tsammani had recently reserved judgement in the petition until a date to be communicated to the parties, shortly after they had adopted their final written addresses.

He also announced that the tribunal will rule on the APM petition on the same day as those of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)/Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi/Labour Party (LP).

The APM which is challenging INEC’s declaration of President Bola Tinubu as winner of the 2023 presidential election, based its arguments on the grounds that Vice President Kashim Shettima, had double nominations as a Senatorial and Vice Presidential candidate before the February 25 polls.

The party listed INEC, President Tinubu, Vice President Shettima, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and Ibrahim Masari as respondents in the petition.
The party prayed the tribunal to nullify Tinubu’s election on the grounds that the process through which the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared him the winner was “flawed”.

Obaseki, who is also a legal practitioner, also said “ If you look at what APM has done, they started by why and when they can question an election and stated three clear provisions, when elections can be questioned, such as section 134 of the electoral act of 2022 as amended.

“In section 134 says the person whose election is questioned must at the time of election not qualified to contest, so they are going to prove that Tinubu and Shettima were not qualified to contest and the three things are clear.

“One, section 35 of the electoral act states that where a candidate allows himself to be nominated by more than one political party or in more than one political constituency, his nomination shall be void, Nigeria is a constituency if you are running for the presidency, a state is a constituency when you are running for Governor, a senatorial district is a constituency when you are running for senate, so as at the time of 2023 election in February and March , both the slot of the Presidency, vice Presidency and the Borno South senatorial district were three different constituencies.

“As at the day of the nomination process, Mr Shettima had two nominations, that is a statement of fact. That is what this petition by the APM has gone ahead to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, the reasonable doubt will only occur if the petition is based on hearsay.

He further argued that the APM petition is based on the correspondence between the APC and INEC.

Obaseki said, “There are five respondents to the petition, INEC, APC, Bola Tinubu, Shettima and Masari. The electoral act states clearly as well as the constitution in tandem because we are looking at both sections 1 (31), (42) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and it states clearly that upon nomination, you can no longer be replaced, unless if you voluntarily withdraw in writing or you die. Upon these scenarios, the party must hold another primary within 14 days and this is not something that is strange.

“First week of February 2023, the governorship candidate of the PDP in Abia state died and within 12 days, a primary was held to replace him because that is what is stipulated by law. There are two things; a primary must be held and it must be within 14 days.

He, however, noted that in the case of the APC candidate, neither was a fresh primary held to get a new vice president.

Obaseki stressed that, “ Because Tinubu won a primary, based on that primary, he choose a Masari. He choose Masari in June and called him a placeholder, the name placeholder is unknown to law, or our constitution and unknown to the electoral act.

He also made reference to the case filed by the PDP on the same issue.

Giving further insights into the matter, Obaseki said, “ People might be wondering that the Supreme Court did not say something about that when PDP went to court, that is very different.

“The PDP went to court in July 2022 to contest the double nomination and placeholder position which is also unknown to law with Mr Masari and Shettima and the court ruled without looking at the substantive case.
“On the Locus, does PDP have the right to question an internal issue of the APC when the election has not been held, because you cannot be guilty of a crime that has not been committed until an election is held, you cannot hold anybody responsible for fielding a wrong candidate, except you are a member of the APC.”