By Vivian Okejeme Abuja
The Presidential Election Petition Court(PEPC) has dismissed the petition filed by the Allied People’s Movement (APM) against the election of President Bola Tinubu.
Dismissing the petition, the court held that it was devoid of merit, incompetent and an abuse of court processes.
The judgement read by Justice Haruna Tsammani dismissed the petition, which was on double nomination of the Vice President, Kashim Shettima on the grounds that the case was a pre-election matter and ought to be filed at the Federal High Court, not before the tribunal.
The five-man panel of the tribunal held the petitioner failed to filed the petition within 14 days as stipulated by law, therefore, the petition already became status barred.
The court held that the case of the APM which was premised on the alleged unlawful nomination and sponsorship of the vice president, Kashim Shettima, was a pure pre-election matter.
Justice Haruna Tsammani held that issue of qualification and disqualification of a candidate is a constitutional matter, adding that the petitioner lacked the necessary locus standi to file the case in the first place, since it did not participate in the primary election of the APC.
Further in the judgement, the panel held that the petitioner failed to prove that Tinubu breached Section 35 of the Electoral Act, 2022, when he nominated Shettima as his Vice, adding that it was the president’s prerogative to choose his running mate.
The court maintained that the case of the petitioner was faulty because Shettima never obtained any nomination form for the position of Vice President not contested any primary election for the position.
Again, the court held that the issue of alleged double nomination has been dealt with by the Supreme Court.
“The petitioner failed to prove that Tinubu was not qualified to contest the February 25 presidential election on the grounds of double nomination”, the court held.
Cited as 1st to 5th defendants in APM’s petition marked: CA/PEPC/04/2023, are the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, President Tinubu, Vice President Kashim Shettima, and Mr. Kabiru Masari.
During the hearing, while the petitioner, through its lawyer, Mr. Andrew Malgwi, SAN, urged the court to sack Tinubu and withdraw the Certificate of Return that was issued to him by INEC, on the other hand, all the Defendants prayed the court to dismiss the case for want of competence.
President Tinubu, through his team of lawyers led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, maintained that the petition the APM lodged against him, lacked merit.
He argued that the sole issue the party relied upon to seek his sack from office, which bordered on allegation that his Vice President, Shettima, was nominated twice by the APC for different elective positions, had already been decided by the supreme Court.
President Tinubu argued that APM’s petition did not only fail to disclose a reasonably cause of action against him, but was equally bereft of substance.
