25 per cent in FCT not required to win presidential election – PEPC; Says $460,000 forfeiture not evidence of conviction against Tinubu

Global Patriot Staff September 6, 2023 Local, News Leave a comment 564 Views

By Wandoo Sombo and Edith Nwapi

Sept. 6, 2023

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) on Wednesday in Abuja said that one does not need to score 25 per cent of votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to win presidential elections in the country.

Delivering the lead judgment in the petition filed by Mr. Peter Obi and the Labour Party, Justice Haruna Tsammani said that scoring 25 per cent was not constitutionally required.

According to Tsammani, the petitioners’ interpretation of Section 134 (2) (b) of the 1999 Constitution was based on a fixation of the word “and” and this is completely fallacious if not outrightly ridiculous.

Justice Tsammani held that there was equality of rights irrespective of which part of the country voters preferred to live in.

“Every citizen must have equality of rights and this includes votes.

“The futility and hollowness in the arguments of the petitioners that the votes of the voters in the FCT have more weight than others in other parts of the country to the extent that their votes purportedly have a greater effect on other votes is null and void,” the court held.

The court held that the votes of voters in the FCT were equal to every other voter in the states in Nigeria, hence, Abuja had no special status.

The News Agency of Nigeria, (NAN) reports that the petitioners had submitted that winning 25 per cent of votes in the FCT in addition to meeting other requirements, was necessary for being declared winner in a presidential election.

$460,000 forfeiture

Meanwhile, the Court has also held that the Labour Party and it’s Presidential Candidate, Mr. Peter Obi failed to provide proof of a criminal conviction against President Bola Tinubu.

The News Agency of Nigeria,(NAN) reports that the petitioners had prayed the court to nullify Tinubu’s election on the grounds that there was a 460, 000 dollars forfeiture order against him by a United States District Court, Illinois.

In his lead judgment on Wednesday in Abuja, Justice Haruna Tsammani held that Obi and his party failed to substantiate allegations of drugs and fraud allegations against President Tinubu.

The tribunal maintained that in the foregoing , Tinubu was duly qualified to contest the Feb. 25 presidential election.

The client maintained that the petitioners failed to prove that Tinubu was found guilty of any offence involving any act of criminality.

The PEPC held that the evidence before the court showed that the forfeiture order against Tinubu was in a civil matter and not criminal matter.

The court said there was no evidence to show that the president was either arraigned or convicted in the US over any alleged crime to warrant his disqualification.

The court opined that the documents tendered by the respondents confirmed that Tinubu was given a clean bill of health upon an enquiry from Nigeria.

“The petitioners have failed to establish their allegation that Tinubu is disqualified from contesting the presidential election under Section 137 (1) (d) of the 1999 Constitution because he was fined 460, 000 dollars by a district court in Illinois, USA.

“The order of forfeiture in exhibit P5 on which the petitioners have relied does not qualify as a sentence or fine or criminal conviction,” the court said.

The court further held that Section 269 (1&2) provides that such documents must be given under the hand of a Police official and must be accompanied with a certificate showing that the police officer has powers to sign such documents.

The court also said that even if Tinubu was convicted for the alleged crime, for him to be disqualified from the 2023 election, the purported conviction must have taken place within 10 years to the election.

Meanwhile the forfeiture order was made nearly three decades ago.

The court also dismissed the claim by Obi and LP that the election that produced Tinubu did not comply with the Electoral Act, 2022, on grounds that results of the election were not transmitted real time to the INEC’s Results Viewing (IReV) portals.

The PEPC also said that there is no where in the Electoral Act, that said that elections must be electronically transmitted for collation.

The court noted that Sections 14 and 18 of the Electoral Act provided for the use of the Bi-modal Verification Accreditation System (BVAS) for the purpose of accreditation of voters.

Justice Tsammani said that the IReV was not a collation system.