₦airaland Forum

highchief1:
I told someone that all LP candidates can lose their seats if they are properly challenged.The way they hurriedly did their primaries was funny.wole just raised a very serious point I’m sure those reps and senators elect will be shaking right now.LP didn’t have a primaries they just write their names down and submitted to inec.

cktheluckyman:
But shebi he shaa paid $460,000 fine ni? That's enough to get him disqualified

The president-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu has told the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal sitting at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, that he was not a party in the drug case that was said to have been filed against him by the United States Government in 1993.

Tinubu, in his response to the petition by Labour Party and its candidate, Mr Peter Obi, said since he was not a party in the criminal case, he was eminently qualified to contest the February 25 presidential election.

Shortly after the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Tinubu the winner of the election, the LP and its candidate approached the tribunal for an order to nullify the election.

But Tinubu and Shettima in their response to the petition urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition by Obi and the LP.

Tinubu said in his reply, “The pleadings in paragraphs 28-31 of the petition hinge the alleged disqualification of the 2nd respondent (Tinubu) on a decision of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division in case No 93C-4483 delivered on October 4, 1993.

“The 2nd respondent herein named was not a party or defendant in the said case No 93C-4483.

“The 2nd respondent was/is not one of the listed parties in the decision Illinois, Eastern Division in case No 93C-4483 delivered on October 4, 1993, was not rendered by a Court or Tribunal created pursuant to any written law in Nigeria.

“This Honourable Court lacks the jurisdiction to enforce the purported judgement of the court in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

“The pleadings in paragraphs 28 –31 of the petition do not disclose a reasonable cause of action cognizable under Sections131, 134 and 137 legislation or instrument under the provisions of a law in Nigeria.

“The decision of the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division in case No 93C-4483 delivered on October 4, 1993 is/was not in respect of any cause of action or offence created by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

“The case of the petitioners as pleaded has not disclosed any disqualifying factor as prescribed by Section 137 (1)(d) and (e) of the Act of the National Assembly or law of a State.”

Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar did not meet the constitutional requirements to be declared winner of the February 25 election, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said.

The commission urged the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) to dismiss the petition by Atiku and his party.

It said: “The first petitioner (Atiku), failed to score, at least, one-quarter of the votes cast in at least two-thirds of the 36 states of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) and as such could not have been declared the winner.”

As against the claim by the petitioners, INEC added: “The election was conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act 2022 and was not marred by any corrupt practices.”

The commission said the President-elect Bola Ahmed Tinubu validly won the election.

INEC said the FCT is not accorded any special status in the constitution as being erroneously portrayed by some political parties and candidates who lost the election.

The umpire stated these in its reply to the petition by the PDP and Atiku.

“That the second respondent (Tinubu) was duly elected by a majority of lawful votes cast in the election and his declaration and return as the winner of the presidential election conducted on the 25th day of February 2023 is lawful, valid and in line with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Electoral Act, 2022.

“Having satisfied the requirements of Section 134 (2) (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, the return of the second respondent as the winner of the presidential election conducted on 25th February 2023 is lawful, valid and constitutional.


“The second respondent was at the time of the election qualified to contest the election.

“The petitioners neither scored the majority of the lawful votes cast at the election nor scored not less than one-quarter of the lawful votes cast in at least two-thirds of the 36 states of the Federation and the FCT.


“Therefore, the first petitioner (Atiku) is not entitled to be returned as the winner of the presidential election conducted on 25th February 2023.”

INEC prayed the court to dismiss the petition.

The commission said the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate met all the legal requirements to be so announced as the winner.

It argued that a candidate must not secure 25 per cent of votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to be declared the winner.

The response was filed on April 11 by its legal team led by the former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN).

On why it returned Tinubu as the winner, INEC said the APC candidate (listed as the second respondent in the petition) “scored 25 per cent of the valid votes cast in 29 states of the federation.”

It added: “Having scored at least one-quarter of the valid votes cast in 29 states, which is over and above the 24 2/3 states threshold required by the Constitution, in addition to scoring the majority of the lawful votes cast at the election, the second respondent was properly declared the winner and returned as the President-elect of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“The second respondent, having scored 25 per cent of the valid votes cast in the 29 states, has satisfied the requirement of the Constitution to be declared winner of the presidential election, thus rendering the requirement of having 25 per cent of the valid votes cast in the FCT unnecessary.

“The declaration and return of the second respondent were not wrongful and was made in accordance with the provisions of Section 134 (2) (b) of the Constitution, the second respondent having scored one quarter (25 per cent) of the valid votes cast in 29 states which are beyond the constitutional threshold for such declaration.

“The first respondent (INEC) denies that scoring 25 per cent of the votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory is a condition precedent to the declaration and return of a candidate in the presidential election.”

INEC added that by the margin of the lead, it did not act hastily, as claimed by Atiku and the PDP in declaring Tinubu the winner.

It noted that Tinubu scored 25 per cent of the valid votes cast in 29 states, namely: Ekiti, Kwara, Osun, Ondo, Ogun, Oyo, Yobe, Lagos, Gombe, Adamawa, Katsina, Jigawa, Nasarawa, Niger, Benue, Akwa Ibom, Edo, Kogi, Bauchi, Plateau, Bayelsa, Kaduna, Kebbi, Kano, Zamfara, Sokoto, Taraba, Borno and Rivers.

While faulting the petitioners’ claim on the status of the FCT, INEC argued that “the provisions of the Constitution apply to FCT as if it were one of the states of the Federation and the use of the word ‘and’ in Section 134 (2) of the Constitution indicates nothing more than that in construing two-thirds of the states of the federation in which a candidate is required to score one-quarter of the votes cast.”

It argued that by the provision of the Constitution, the FCT “has the status of a state and ought to be recognised as if were a state of the federation.”

It added that the FCT, beyond being the country’s capital “has no special constitutional status over and above the other 36 states of the Federation to require a candidate in the presidential election to obtain at least 25 per cent of the votes cast in the FCT before being declared winner of the presidential election”.

INEC added: “The FCT is regarded as the 37th state of the federation and as such, a candidate needs to score 25 per cent of the valid votes cast in at least two-thirds of 37 states (to be declared as winner in the presidential election.”

Kobojunkie:
OP, do you still believe in all of the above ?

Nigerians’ hope of having more access to cash was dashed yesterday.

The banks had no improvement in the cash allocation they have been getting from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) despite last Friday’s Supreme Court verdict on the recirculation of all old naira notes.

The Nation gathered that the situation was not helped by the Federal Government’s inability to get the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment.

It was learnt that the government must obtain the CTC before it can direct the CBN to comply with the judgment.

The government’s lawyers were sighted at the Supreme Court in Abuja trying to get the CTC.

Before the lawyers arrived at the apex court, many Nigerians who thronged commercial banks with the hope of making withdrawals left disappointed as they were not paid.

None of the banks visited by The Nation reporter in the Central Business District of Abuja and Wuse zones 2 and 3 paid the old and new naira notes through their counters and Automated Teller Machines (ATMs).

A few residents of Lagos were however lucky as they were paid old notes across the counters and ATMs.


One of the government’s lawyers said: “The Federal Government has not enforced the judgment because it is yet to receive the CTC. There is no way the government will act on the spur of the moment.

“After obtaining the CTC, the government will isolate the order(s) of the court before directing the CBN and other statutory agencies to comply.”

The lawyer was, however, optimistic that “in the next 24 hours or 48 hours, all the parties will get a copy of the judgment.”

He added that it was “preemptive” for people to “assume that the government has not carried out the order of the court”.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers were also in the court expecting the CTC in order to determine their line action, including contempt proceeding if the judgment is not enforced.

A counsel to one of the plaintiffs said: “It is true that we are all waiting for the CTC of the judgment.

“I think the Federal Government is only trying to be technical because the Supreme Court’s judgment was loud and clear.

“We will give them the benefit of doubt. But the government has no choice but to abide by the rule of law.

“On our part, as soon as we get the CTC, we will register it before a Federal High Court to enable us to file contempt proceedings against the Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), and the CBN Governor Godwin Emefiele.

“We are on standby for contempt proceedings if the Federal Government ignores the judgment of the Supreme Court.”

In Lagos, a banker, who asked that his identity be veiled, said he could not say when the cash scarcity would abate.

“Banks don’t hoard money. If banks have the money, they will give it out,” the banker added.

The official said in normal times, banks load each ATM with an average of N8 million.

He claimed that when he inquired from banks in two states about their cash position, he was told that 13 branches got only N16 million.

The official, who confirmed that his branch paid a few customers yesterday with the old notes, said no bank had received any directive nor cash from the CBN.

Last week, The Nation gathered that only about N13 million was released to a Lagos bank that has over 40 branches.

But a Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) source told The Nation that the apex bank was “working towards alleviating the sufferings of the people.”

He pleaded with Nigerians to give the CBN “the benefit of the doubt.”

A Lagos resident, Johnson Okanlawon, said two commercial bank branches in Iyana Ipaja did not pay the old notes across the counter but loaded their ATMs with both old and new notes.

“I sent my salesgirl to one of the banks in Iyana Ipaja to deposit old notes. The salesgirl came back to inform me that the banks had resumed payment of the old notes.

“We have also seen customers freely buying and selling in the old notes within our axis,” Okanlawon said.

Another resident said he was paid N20,000 in old N500 denominations across the counter by a bank in Abule-Egba

“I was paid N20,000 in old N500 notes in the banking hall. I felt very relieved because, in the past two weeks, I never had up to N2,000 cash. In fact, I was very lucky today (yesterday),” he smiled as he walked away from the bank premises.

But checks across several bank branches in Ibeju-Lekki and Victoria Island showed that cash scarcity had yet to abate.

At the Ibeju-Lekki branch of one of the banks, officials told customers that they had no cash to pay.

“We do not have the cash to pay anybody. We only attend to customers carrying out intra- and interbank transfers, and activation of ATM cards,” one of the bank workers said.

Legal icon Wole Olanipekun and 49 other lawyers have offered to defend the victory of President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the Presidential Election Tribunal.
The Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and one-time President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) is leading the team of legal giants.

The lawyers are waiting to be served with the petitions of the candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, and the Labour Party (LP), Mr. Peter Obi.

Both opposition candidates have registered their displeasure with the declaration of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate as winner of the February 25 poll.

Tinubu got 8, 794,726 votes to beat Atiku and Obi to the second and third positions with 6,984,520 and 6,101,533 scores respectively.

But the first and second runners-up have sought leave of the tribunal to inspect some election materials used for the poll.

Members of the Tinubu legal team are to hold their preliminary meeting today in Lagos. They are to discuss some of the issues in the public domain which may be included in the petitions of the PDP and the LP.

There were indications that some PDP governors may join in the case before the tribunal to testify that the poll was free and fair in their states.

Investigations showed that some of the 50 SANs were said to have opted for free service to actualise Tinubu’s mandate.

It was learnt that a few of them joined the team based on the conviction that the presidential election was the “freest and fairest” in the country’s history with large-scale upsets.


Some of the senior lawyers in the vanguard of defending Tinubu’s mandate are a former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Akin Olujimi, Yusuf Ali, Lateef Fagbemi, A.U. Mustapha, Ahmed Raji, Abiodun Owonikoko, Kemi Pinheiro, Niyi Akintola and H.M. Liman.

Others are: Taiwo Osipitan, Babatunde Ogala, Roland Otaru, James Onoja, Muiz Banire, Olusola Oke and a former Bauchi State Governor Mohammed Abubakar.

A source, who spoke in confidence, said: “Buoyed by patriotism and the need to protect the sanctity of the ballot, about 50 SANs have signed up to defend the mandate of Asiwaju Tinubu. The figure may be more in the next few days.

“Some of these legal giants have either not met with Tinubu or seeking any favour from him. They believe that the February 25 poll was credible and the best in the history of Nigeria.”

The source added: “In spite of the noise in the media, both Atiku and Obi have not served Tinubu and APC a copy of any petition before the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal.

“But the defence team of Tinubu will meet on Tuesday (today) in Lagos ahead of allowing Atiku and Obi to get their acts together.”

Section 130 (1, 2and 3) of the Electoral Act 2022 says: “ “No election and return at any election under this Act shall be questioned in any manner other than by a petition complaining of an undue election or undue return presented to the competent tribunal or court in accordance with the provisions of the constitution or of this Act and in which the person elected or returned is joined as a party.

“In this part, ‘tribunal’ means-(a) in the case of the presidential election, the Court of Appeal; and (b) in the case of any other elections under this Act, the election tribunal established under the Constitution or by this Act.

“The election tribunals shall-(a) be constituted not later than 30 days before the election; and (b) when constituted, open their registries for business seven days before the election.”

President of the Senate, Ahmad Lawan, yesterday, claimed that the Electoral Act, 2022, did not provide for electronic transmission of election results.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtvU5DDzTGE

Lawan made the claim while contributing to a motion sponsored by Senator Ibrahim Oloriegbe, representing Kwara Central Senatorial District on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), on the controversies trailing the February 25 Presidential and National Assembly elections.

The President of the Senate, said that what was passed by the National Assembly was snapping of election results and transferring to the server of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Senator Oloriegbe, in his motion, asked the Senate to urge all political actors, leaders and every Nigerian to remain calm and allow collation and announcement of the presidential and National Assembly elections results to continue based on the provisions of the Electoral Act.

Senator Sani Musa, from Niger State, said that since Nigerians did not vote electronically, the issue of asking INEC to transmit it electronically was unnecessary because the Electoral Act didn’t mandate the electoral body to do so.

However, the debate generated controversy among the lawmakers along party lines, as the PDP senators disagreed and demanded that the motion be stepped down.

The Minority Whip of the Senate, Senator Chukwuka Utazi, while contributing, asked the INEC to follow the Electoral Act or the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Speaking, Senator Uche Ekwunife, a People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Chieftain, representing Anambra Central, also insisted that INEC should be asked to stick to the Electoral Act.

Senator Biodun Olujimi, also a member of the opposition PDP, appealed for peace, urging Nigerians to wait patiently so that the matter would be resolved without plunging the country into avoidable chaos.

Furthermore, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele of the ruling APC, while speaking on the issue, urged INEC to do the right thing based on the provisions of Electoral Act, appealing to Nigerians to be patient with INEC to complete the process.

He also called on the Judiciary to do the right thing, pointing out that as long as the right thing was done, all agitations would be assuaged and peace would reign.

The Deputy Senate Whip, Aliyu Sabi, in his position, appealed to Nigerians to allow the process to proceed so that democracy would be strengthened.

Many of the lawmakers made contributions, in support of the motion, leading to its approval, after the President of the Senate put it to voice vote.

In his closing remarks on the motion, Lawan urged any one who was not satisfied with the verdict of INEC to go to court but not cause trouble in the country.