Share this story

As Nigerians wait eagerly for the final verdict of the ongoing Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal, PEPT Realnews takes a look at the decisions already taken so far.

The tribunal began with the Allied Peoples Movement, APM’s Suit challenging the qualification of vice President Kashim Shettima as President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s running mate.

The petition argued that Shettima’s nomination breached Section 35 of the Electoral Act 2022 and other constitutional provisions.

However, for the Preliminary Objection, the court held that the petitioner, APM ought to have filed the case (of double nomination) before the Federal High Court within 14 days from the day the cause of action arose.


The court agreed with the respondent, that the issue is statute barred.

Justice Tsammani who is reading the lead judgement, further added that section 285(14c), does not allow members of a political party to challenge the nomination of candidates of another political party.


He concluded that the petitioner lacks the locus standi to institute the petition. He therefore struck out the suit for lack of merit.

Also in the case of Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Peter Obi of the Labour Party, LP and the Allied Peoples Movement, APM challenging President Bola Tinubu’s declaration as the winner of the 2023 presidential election, tribunal ruled that INEC was at Liberty to define its mode of Transmitting Election Results.


Furthermore, the petition also struck out Obi, LP’s petition against Tinubu on grounds of criminal conviction, and ruled that the petitioners failed to prove that Tinubu Was convicted in the US.

In its ruling, the Tribunal noted that the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, failed to prove that President Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress, APC was convicted for money laundering in the United States.


The five-man panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani ruled that no record of criminal arrest or conviction was established against Tinubu by the petitioners – Obi and the LP.

Similarly, the tribunal has also dismissed LP/Obi’s Petition for 25 percent needed to win the presidential election.


According to the ruling, FCT residents have no special privileges as the petitioners claimed.

The court also rejected the reports of forensic analyses tendered by LP’s three witnesses on the grounds that they were made during the pendency of the case or by an interested party.


This is even as it also rejected the European Union report on the polls, arguing that it was not tendered by an official of the body.

Similarly, the Tribunal also declared APC’s petition on Obi’s membership incompetent. Justice Abba who read the verdict noted that membership in a political party is an internal affair.


The Tribunal also touched on the issue of the non-joinder of Atiku Abubakar who came second and wondered how Obi & LP’s petition could be effectively determined without joining the candidate who placed second in the polls.

However, on LP’s claims of widespread irregularities, the tribunal ruled that they were Generic.

Lennox Mall

It stated that Obi’s petition only alleged that there were widespread irregularities without giving the particulars and the polling units.

Justice Abba Mohammed held that In a presidential election held in 176,866 polling units in 774 Local Government Areas, it would be improper not to specify where these irregularities occurred.


According to him, the petitioners only made generic allegations.

“Pleading must set out material facts and particulars. In the instant petition, there was no effort to prove specific allegations, particulars of complaints,” said the Tribunal.


The law is clear that where someone alleges irregularities in a particular polling unit, such person must prove the particular irregularities in that polling unit before that petition can succeed, the Tribunal added.

The tribunal insisted that the petitioners did not prove the particular polling unit where the election did not take place nor did they specify particulars of polling units where there are alleged complainants of irregularities.

“It was only in one instance that figures were given of alleged suppressed votes and we all know that elections are about figures,” it said.

“LP alleged that INEC reduced their scores and added it to APC votes but failed to supply particulars of what they actually scored before the said reductions, neither did they supply the polling units where it happened”


More details later…

Share this story

Leave a Reply