Jonathan and PDP must answer allegation of rigging, says Tribunal

By GOWON EMAKPE

July 15, 2011 03:12AM
Print print Email email Share Share


The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja, yesterday said President Goodluck Jonathan and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) must answer allegation of rigging and other irregularities in the petition filed by the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) challenging the result of the 2011 presidential election.

Presiding judge, Ayo Salami, dismissed the preliminary objection of Mr Jonathan and the PDP asking the tribunal to dismiss the petition because it was filed on Sunday, which was a non-working day, saying that the petition is competent and would be heard on its merit.

"The days of technicalities are over; the tribunal will hear and determine the petition on its merit," he said, adding that the petition is competent as the registry of the tribunal was open for business on Sunday in order to hasten the assignment of the tribunal as it has a life spam.

On the objection that the tribunal should dismiss the petition because it was not properly constituted, as Muhammadu Buhari and Tunde Bakare, for whose benefit the petition was filed, were not made parties to the petition, Mr Salami ruled that the Electoral Act and the 2010 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria permits the CPC petition.

"The Electoral Act 2010 and the 2010 Constitution allows either the candidates or the party or both to file an election petition before an election petition tribunal," he ruled.

Wole Olanipekun, counsel to Mr Jonathan, in his application asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition because it was filed on Sunday, which was a non-working day.

Mr Olanipekun argued that the registry of the court, under applicable rules, is not to be opened on a Sunday for the transaction of any business.

He further argued that the CPC could not show cause why they filed the petition on Sunday, since they had two more days to exhaust the 21 filing days as guaranteed by the Electoral Act and cited a statute, Sunday of Servant Act of 1677, which states that "no public business should be carried out on Sunday." The lawyer also said the tribunal should dismiss the petition because it was not properly constituted, as Muhammadu Buhari and Tunde Bakare, for whose benefit the petition was filed, were not made parties to the petition.

No time for technicalities

Mr Jonathan and the PDP are challenging the legitimacy of the petition filed by the CPC seeking to nullify the April 16 presidential election. In the objection, Mr Jonathan and PDP said that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the petition.

Joe Gadzama, counsel to the PDP, aligned himself with Mr Jonathan's counsel to seek the dismissal of the petition.

According to Mr Jonathan and his running mate, Namadi Sambo, the court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the petition because some of the grounds relied upon by the petitioner were pre-election matters which could not be determined by an election tribunal.

But Ebun Sofunde, counsel to the CPC, told the court that the provisions cited by Mr Olanipekun cannot be read in isolation of Section 150 of the Evidence Act.

According to him, it has not been suggested that the petitioners forced the registry of the court open, saying it is the person objecting to the validity of the filing that ought to file an affidavit that there was no directive for the registry to open, even as he submitted that the question of the last day of filing is totally irrelevant.

Joined as defendants in the suit are the Independent National Electoral Commission; its chairman, Attahiru Jega; Goodluck Jonathan, Namadi Sambo, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and the Resident Electoral Commissioners for the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

The CPC is contesting the result of the election in about 20 states of the federation. Though a copy of the petition was not made available to journalists, Mr Sofunde said the election was non-complaint with the Electoral Act 2010 alleging irregularities.

They are to call 151 witnesses to prove their case.

The tribunal had recently ordered the INEC to provide to the CPC the list of local contractors engaged by the commission to print ballot papers used in the presidential election. It also directed INEC to allow the petitioners unfettered access to ballot papers and other electoral materials used in the April presidential election in the custody of the electoral body.

Back

nice one by the tribunal

What kind of country is this Why is Salami still sitting in a courtroom as judge in this Nigeria Is he not the same judge accused of collecting N3 billion from Bola Tinubu and co to deliver judgements in favour of Fayemi and Aregbesola in Ekiti and Osun states respectively

Considering that there is an ongoing inquiry into illicit telephone calls between him and ACN chieftains around the time of those judgements, he should recuse himself from sitting in cases involving PDP. In a normal clime, that's what would have been done.

Now, he's sitting in judgement over them. It can only go one way, and that's against PDP, no matter what the evidence in their favour is.

Okay, nice to know.

@djustice
Mr man it is one thing to accuse someone on suspicion and its another to get a conviction.As far as we know he is a valid judge of the Fed. republic of Nigeria Judiciary until convicted and deposed of his position as a Judge by the NJC.Simple grammar,we always like to take wrong turns when it doesn't serve us well.
Further more in any case, the PDP lawyers sense bias they definitely have multiple options like request a transfer or change of courts on allegations that the Judge is bias.If they so choose to continue then who are you to doubt his credibility in Judgement.