Introduction
Proving that the 2019 Presidential election was substantially non-compliance will be very difficult for Atiku & the PDP.

Based on this awareness, the legal counsel of the respondents came to the Tribunal with a lazy strategy. Their plans were to avoid cross examination, to explore technicalities, to prevent server inspection and to discredit petitioners’ evidences.

As you read through this thought-provoking thread, you will discover how the legal counsels of the petitioners were able to spring a surprise and weather the storm through the following strategies:

1. The various issues for determination were reordered.
2. Some issues for determination were merged.
3. Submission of new academic qualifications for Buhari was rejected.
4. Arguments that Buhari’s qualification issue was a pre-election matter were rejected.
5. Summary of wrong computation of votes in 11 focal states was tendered.
6. False information in Buhari affidavit were re-emphasized
7. The inec server result.
8. The inec server distraction.
9. Plan B (Inconclusive Elections).
10. Conclusion

1. Reordering the issues for determination
One of the things that delighted my heart was the way the petitioners’ legal counsel reordered the issues for determination starting with the most brutal ones. Take for example the issue of Buhari’s non-qualification was presented as the first issue for determination followed by the submission of false information to inec. This was a brilliant move by the legal counsel of Atiku & the PDP.

2. Some issues for determination were merged.
In order to reinforce the strength of the petitioner’s final written address, some issues were merged together. The issues of non-qualification and false information were argued together so as to weaken the defence counsel of the respondents. Also the issues of electoral corruption plus non-compliance were merged as well. Thus, the respondents made the mistake of addressing one of the merged issues and abandoning the other, which is equally as important.

3. Submission of new academic qualifications for Buhari were rejected
The 2nd respondent tried to bring in more credentials that were not listed in Buhari’s resume and in his form CF001 but their efforts were checkmated. Atiku’s legal counsel posited that any fresh qualifications that were not contained in exhibit P1 (Form CF001) is unnecessary to the questioned election and can not be allowed in determining Buhari’s qualification as at the time of the election. See page 7, paragraph 3.15 of petitioner’s final address to Buhari.

4. Arguments that buhari’s qualification issue was a pre-election matter were rejected
While the respondents argued that Buhari’s qualification issue was a pre-election matter thus statute barred, petitioners’ counsel rejected this position.

Atitu’s lawyers argued that failure to fulfil the conditions relating to qualification as stipulated in section 131(d) of the constitution is a valid ground for questioning an election. The case of Dingyadi & Anor versus Inec (2010) was cited where the Supreme Court held that non-qualification is a ground for questioning an election in an election petition. See page 6, paragraph 3.10 of petitioner’s final address.

5. False information in Buhari affidavit were re-emphasized
The respondents tried to be crafty by arguing that the petitioners failed to prove that Buhari submitted false information in his affidavit. Consequently, Atiku’s legal counsel reminded them that Buhari’s witness had already reinforced the petitioner’s evidence and that the respondent did not even contest the adduced evidence.

Sadly for Apc, inec & Buhari, they did not call a single witness or provide any evidence to prove that the information in his affidavit is true, which means that they have agreed that the information is false as alleged.

6. Cambridge versus WAEC result
The discrepancies between the Cambridge result and the waec result were also highlighted. One result showed 6 subjects while another showed 8 subjects. The petitions’ counsel went on to conclude that both results are not reliable. Besides, both results bear a strange name (Mohamed Buhari). Sadly, the respondents did not explain the discrepancies and one of their witnesses also confess that the Cambridge document is not a certificate during cross examination.

7. Wrong computation of votes in 11 focal states
The votes of APC were inflated by 5.98 million at the various stages of collation. Also the votes of the PDP were inflated as well by APC riggers just to cause confusion and give an impression that both parties rigged the election. The petitioners consequently argued that a readjustment of the result will show that PDP won the election with a margin of over 200,000 votes.

Atiku’s legal counsel cleverly brought in this conclusion @ the eleventh hour through a statistician who analysed all the result sheets and compared them with what INEC announced. The respondents did not respond to this allegation because it was an ambush and they were helpless.

8. INEC server result
All the 3 respondents did not lead any evidence to disproof the server result adduced by the petitioners’ counsel. This is a big plus for Atiku and the PDP because were a party fails to lead evidence in his pleading, the pleading is deemed to be abandoned. Also, the respondent assertion that e-collation & transmission were prohibited by the electoral act was rebuffed by the petitioners. The respondents were reminded that section 52(2) of the 2015 electoral act as amended had removed the restriction on electronic voting.

9. INEC server distraction
The noise and controversy generated by the server also created sufficient distraction to the respondents’ team, especially INEC. While the Atiku Team were busy proving other grounds of their petition, the respondents were struggling on how to deny the existence of the server.

As part of their lazy strategy, rather than disprove the contents of the server, they took the bait of denying the existence of a server, only for them to admit it later at the close of the case. This threw their credibility into the gutter.

10. Plan B (Inconclusive Elections)
Another brilliant move by the petitioners was to throw in an alternative prayer to declare the elections as inconclusive and order a rerun. They established that the actual total number of void/rejected votes was higher than the difference between Atiku and Buhari, thus, INEC ought to have declared the elections as inconclusive. The respondents had no answer to this. This was like a Plan B, so that even if the respondents’ team found any technicality to rely on, the case would be salvaged.

11. Conclusion
From all indications, the petitioner’s counsels have done very well and the 2019 election is very likely to be the first Presidential election that will be reversed by our Judiciary.

Many will argue from a lazy perspective that it has never happened before and so the electoral fraud of Buhari will survive judicial scrutiny. Well, that it has never happened before does not mean it will not happen one day.

Yaradua almost lost at the Supreme Court in 2008 due to a minor issue (non-serialized ballot papers). However, the issues with the 2019 Presidential election are multi-dimensional and the evidences are stronger.

In conclusion, the failure of the 2 of the respondents to call any witness is a big plus for the petitioners and these are the reasons why many learned people can easily conclude that #atikuiscoming to #sackbuhari


By: Dokun Ojomo @DokunOjomo & David Ashaolu @AshaKonko

I hope all these epistles to uplift the orphan you scammed won't turn to tears when atiku cum finally starts gushing down your cheeks as tears in the next three dsys

What load of rubbish from the writer and a senseless OP
You mean during the entire tribunal sitting APC counsel were unable to score a single point that you can highlight just to present an atom of fair reporting ? Only a fool will hold on to submission in this article it is indeed senseless thoughtless and expectedly only for fools to believe.

Yardua vz Buhari case mentioned, you should remember Yardua admitted the election was rigged in his favour, I guess you have no idea the gravity of the statement. Buhari is yet to admit such and declared himself the winner on so many fronts.

Lazy or not Atiku will never cum
You will also be confirmed the fool once Atiku's case as been thrown into the lagoon in Abuja.
I have no time arguing with lunatics anymore on NL.
I will simply wait to confirm your foolishness after the tribunal ruling.
I know you will be no where to be found then but that in no way negate you are indeed foolish.

tourplanet84:


11. Conclusion
From all indications, the petitioner’s counsels have done very well and the 2019 election is very likely to be the first Presidential election that will be reversed by our Judiciary.

By: Dokun Ojomo @DokunOjomo & David Ashaolu @AshaKonko