TRIBUNAL: INEC To Start Defending Tinubu’s Victory July 3 As PDP, LP Close Cases With 40 Witnesses

The People’s Democratic Party on Friday closed its case at the Presidential Election Petitions Court after presenting a total of 27 witnesses to challenge President Bola Tinubu’s election victory.

“Pursuant to the pre-hearing report, may we most humbly apply to close the case for the petitioners,” PDP lead counsel, Chris Uche added.

The panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani then said the “ball is now in the court” of the Independent National Electoral Commission and other respondents to defend Tinubu’s victory in line with its pre-hearing report.

INEC’s lawyer Oluwakemi Pinheiro SAN, pleaded that the PEPC should permit the electoral umpire and other respondents to open their defence after the Salah Celebration break.

He said that was the agreement between lawyers to parties.

On his part, Wole Olanipekun SAN, counsel for Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima, assured the panel that he and other respondents would conclude their defense within one week.

Ruling on their application, the court “adjourned the petition to July 3 for defense.”

Earlier at the resumption of proceedings, the court cautioned Barrister Mike Enahoro Ebah regarding how he was not giving straight answers thrown at him by the lawyers representing President Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress.

The witness (PW27) presented by the Peoples Democratic party had earlier tendered in evidence the notarised judgment of the US District Court regarding Tinubu’s alleged forfeiture of funds traced to his bank account suspected to be proceeds of narcotic deals, as well as printed extract of Guinean passport of the president, among other particulars.

It was admitted as Atiku’s evidence.

Under cross-examination by Tinubu’s lawyer, Olanipekun SAN, Enahoro said the US University which is the official custodian of Tinubu’s academic records, issued them to him.

The witness told the court that he instituted a criminal complaint (CR/121/2022) against Tinubu at the Magistrate court sitting in Abuja.

Olanipekun then tendered the court case Enahoro filed against Tinubu to the PEPC but PDP lawyer, Chris Uche SAN, raised an objection.

But the court admitted them as evidence.

In his court case, the witness said the Chief Magistrate of the Court declined jurisdiction on his complaint and no court order was made.

On the Guinean passport he tendered, he said he downloaded it from the internet.

“As a lawyer, did you find out from the Guinean Embassy whether Tinubu renounced the purported citizenship,” Olanipekun asked.

The witness did not answer yes or no but said he read on an online news platform, Sahara reporters, that the Guinean president confirmed Tinubu’s citizenship.

“Don’t try to dribble the court,” the panel told Enahoro, adding that even though he is a lawyer, he should respond to the questions “the way you are asked.”

The court also told the PDP lawyer, Uche to prevail on the witness to answer questions appropriately.

“Some of us here have practiced the legal profession for 40 years. We are not dumb,” Justice Haruna Tsammani told the witness, looking in his direction.

Enahoro eventually admitted that he did not find out about Tinubu’s passport from the Guinean Embassy.

Olanipekun insisted that the passport he tendered expired in 2020 but Enahoro replied that citizenship does not expire.

Speaking further on the US judgment that led to President Tinubu’s forfeiture of $460,000 to the U.S government, the witness said he was not aware that the US Consulate in Nigeria on February 4, 2003, stated that there are no criminal records against Tinubu.

“Are you aware that the Chicago State University in June 27 2022, in a statement duly signed by Caleb Weisberg stated that Tinubu attended and graduated from the school?,” Olanipekun further asked the witness, to which he said he was not aware.

Olanipekun then tendered the school’s statement as evidence but Uche objected while INEC and APC supported the tendered document.

The court admitted it.

Olanipekun asked the witness to tell the court whether there was an arraignment, plea, trial of Tinubu in the US Court judgment which he tendered.

The witness tried explaining that Tinubu forfeited a huge sum of money but a member of the panel interjected and said he should tell the layman if Tinubu pleaded guilty or not.

“On the face of the court judgement, there was no arraignment or plea, but Tinubu agreed to forfeit,” the witness replied.

“With all respect, you will not like anyone to scandalize you?

“I don’t want anyone to scandalize me that is why I will not forge documents,” Enahoro replied.

APC’s lawyer, Lateef Fagbemi SAN, asked Enahoro if the documents he tendered from Chicago State University were certified by the school.

The witness insisted the letter from the University attached to the academic records means the school records do not require any certification.

But the panel told the witness that he should stop “all this dribbling…”

The witness was then asked if he was a member of APC. He replied that he is “part of the Obidient movement of the Labour party.”

The witness was eventually discharged by the court.

LP CLOSES PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE

Meanwhile, the Labour Party and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, also closed their case today after calling a total of 13 witnesses and presenting several electoral documents including INEC Form EC8As.

The Chief Spokesman of the LP Presidential Campaign Council and National Director, Media, Labour party, Yunusa Tanko testified on Friday.

He told the PEPC that he also served as the national collation agent at the party’s situation room.

Being led in evidence by Obi’s lead counsel, Livy Uzoukwu SAN, he tendered receipts issued by INEC to LP for several documents requested from the electoral umpire by the party.

The court admitted them in evidence.

He had earlier tendered 18,088 blurred polling unit results downloaded from IREV certified by INEC.

The five-man panel of the court led by Justice Haruna Tsammani admitted them as evidence.

Under cross-examination by INEC lawyer, Oluwakemi Pinheiro SAN, Yunusa confirmed he was in Abuja during the February 25 presidential election, adding he voted at a polling unit in Dutse Alhaji and returned to the party’s situation room in Asokoro to monitor events nationwide.

He was also presented with a copy of a Federal High Court judgement on Labour Party versus INEC (FHC/ABJ/CS/1454/2022), delivered on January 3, 2023.

Yunusa confirmed the court judgement and Pinheiro tendered it as evidence before the PEPC.

Obi’s lead counsel, Livy Uzoukwu SAN objected to the tendering of the FHC judgement but withheld his reasons until his final address.

Lawyers representing President Bola Tinubu and All Progressives Congress backed INEC on its request to tender the court judgement and the court admitted it.

He was asked to read the last two paragraphs of the said judgment of the trial court in open court, wherein the judge held there is nowhere INEC is mandated to only use an electronic means in collating and transferring results.

Yunusa was also shown Form EC8A, Polling Unit 070, Ward 07, LGA 02, FCT, by the INEC lawyer.

He said the scores on the forms shown to him by INEC lawyer are blurred, mutilated and the figures cancelled with strong ink.

“In your deposition, have you stated the unlawful votes ascribed by INEC to Tinubu,” Tinubu’s lawyer stated but Yunusa said he did not.

“In Anambra state, Peter Obi scored 95.7 percent of the votes cast. Do you want the court to cancel the votes scored by Obi?” Tinubu’s lawyer, Wole Olanipekun, asked Yunusa to which he responded that he wanted the court to order INEC to upload the actual votes scored by Obi as against the one announced.

Asked if he experiences network failure on his mobile phone, Yunusa responded “seemingly so”.

He was asked to state the unlawful votes credited to Tinubu as he claimed in his statement on oath.

“Our expert documented the actual scores in his report,” Yunusa replied, saying he doesn’t have it offhand.

The witness added that the wasted votes INEC accredited to Tinubu are also contained in the evidence of its expert.

“We are challenging the entire election declared by INEC,” Yunusa said.

Yunusa was discharged for another witness, Peter Emmanuel Yari, to enter the witness box.

Emmanuel adopted his statement on oath which he filed today.

He said he served as an ad-hoc INEC presiding officer and could not upload the scanned copy of INEC Form EC8A using the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System BVAS machine provided by the electoral umpire.

The petitioners, who have been tendering their evidence since May 8, will now be in the position to cross-examine the witnesses fielded by INEC and the legal team of Tinubu and the APC.

While Atiku had promised to field 100 witnesses, Obi’s lawyers had assured they would field 50.

But on Friday, the former ended with 27 witnesses while the latter concluded with 13 witnesses.

Though belonging to separate parties, PDP and LP had filed motions seeking permission for live transmission of proceedings as well as an order to inspect the BVAS machines used for the election, among others.

But the panel struck out the application for live transmission.

The PEPC had also directed INEC to reconfigure the BVAS machine while supplying the petitioners with the data extracted from the machines, among other electoral materials.