The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) sitting in Abuja on Saturday, admitted in evidence two video clips of Channels Television tendered by Presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) Mr Peter Obi, and his party, challenging the declaration of Bola Tinubu of the All-Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the 2023 presidential election.
The video clips marked as Exhibits PBH3 and PBH4 respectively, tendered through a staff of Channels Television, Mr. Lucky Ibewo Isowome showed INEC chairman, Prof Mahmood Yakubu stating the preparation of the electoral body in ensuring a hitch-free presidential election as well as the assurance by INEC’s Information Commissioner, Mr. Festus Okoye stating that results of the general elections will be transmitted to INEC’s server electronically by the use of Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS) and other strategies put in place by INEC for smooth conduct of the elections.
The petitioners also tendered other documents duly certified by INEC to prove their petition marked as, CA/PEPC/03/2023.
The court admitted the documents as exhibits despite the objections by the INEC, Tinubu, Shettima, and the APC, who were the respondents in the petition.
Meanwhile, the court, at Saturday’s proceedings dismissed Obi’s request to interrogate the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) experts used during the conduct of the February 25 presidential election.
A five-member panel of Justices of the court, presided over by Justice Haruna Tsammani in a unanimous decision held that the two applications were incompetent and lacking in merit and accordingly dismissed them.
The court, in a unanimous ruling, dismissed the motion on the ground that it was filed out of time.
According to the court, “The application fails, and it is accordingly dismissed”.
Justice Tsammani held that the petitioners failed to establish “the existence of an extreme circumstance” for the granting of such applications.
According to the court, applications relating to electoral matters including interrogatories must be filed and heard during the pre-hearing session, adding that any application which is brought after the end of pre-hearing must show extreme circumstances why the court should hear it.
Justice Tsammani held that the claim of the petitioners that the application was filed on May 22, the last day of pre-hearing could not be sustained because they failed to counter the submission of counsel to the All-Progressives Congress (APC) Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), that the application was filed at the close of pre-hearing and not served on some of the respondents.
The panel further noted that even if the petitioners had filed on May 22, they ought to have drawn the attention of the court to the motion of notice, stating that not doing so was an indication that they may have abandoned the motion.
While stating that the petitioners did not challenge the report of the panel that pre-hearing session ended on May 22, “nor draw the attention of the court to the pending applications”, Justice Tsammani held that, “It is the duty of a party who file a motion to indicate its intention to move it…a process not moved is deemed not to have been filed”.
The panel further stated that it was wrong for the petitioners to blame the respondents or the court for a motion which was not filed or moved.
Obi and LP had in their motion prayed to the court for an order compelling INEC to supply them with the names and profiles of the ICT experts that participated in one way or another in the February 25 presidential election.
Besides, Obi and his party raised 12 questions to be forwarded to INEC for answers.
It is the position of the petitioners that INEC did not only breach its own regulations and guidelines for the conduct of the presidential election but manipulated the process so that the outcome provides specific desired results.
It was further stated in their submission that the request, if granted, will assist them in establishing their petition challenging the declaration of Bola Tinubu as the winner of the February 25 presidential election.
The two applications; the first seeking leave of court to bring the application and the second, which was the main application, was first filed on May 22 and replaced with another dated June 2.
