President Bola Tinubu has taken a decisive stance in response to the appeal filed by Atiku Abubakar, the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the February 25 presidential election, challenging the declaration of Tinubu as the president.
Tinubu’s request to the Supreme Court calls for the dismissal of Atiku’s appeal, citing a lack of merit and an alleged abuse of court process.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had declared President Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the presidential election on March 1, based on the conviction that he had secured a majority of the lawful votes cast.
However, dissatisfied with the outcome, Atiku lodged a petition with the tribunal on March 21, seeking the nullification of President Tinubu’s election due to alleged irregularities, malpractices, and non-compliance with electoral laws, among other issues.
The tribunal, in a unanimous judgment delivered on September 6, upheld the declaration of President Tinubu as the winner of the presidential poll. The panel, led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, pointed out that Atiku’s petition had failed to substantiate the allegations and subsequently dismissed it for lacking merit.
Unyielding in his pursuit, Atiku filed an appeal with the Supreme Court on September 18, seeking to set aside the tribunal’s judgment, which he argued was perverse and did not adequately address his case. He presented 35 grounds upon which he challenged the tribunal’s ruling and introduced new evidence suggesting that President Tinubu should not have been on the ballot due to an alleged forgery of his Chicago State University (CSU) certificate submitted to INEC.
Furthermore, relying on Section 137 of the Constitution, Atiku urged the Supreme Court to disqualify President Tinubu for providing false information regarding his academic qualifications.
In response to this appeal, President Tinubu, represented by a team of lawyers led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, argued that Atiku and his party failed to demonstrate any valid reason for the Supreme Court to overturn the lower court’s findings. They contended that the lower court’s judgment was firmly rooted in law and scholarly expertise.
Tinubu’s response raised seven key issues for determination by the Supreme Court, which include the competence of the grounds of appeal in Atiku’s Notice of Appeal and the issues presented in the appellants’ brief.
