Skip to content
Home » Supreme Court appoints panel to hear Atiku, Obi’s appeal against Tinubu

Supreme Court appoints panel to hear Atiku, Obi’s appeal against Tinubu

The Supreme Court of Nigeria has formed a seven-member panel of justices to hear appeals from three presidential candidates challenging the results of the February 25 election. The notices for the hearing have been officially served to Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), and Chichi Ojei of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM).

These notices, signed by Zainab M. Garba in the registrar’s office, confirm the proper notification of the involved parties, in accordance with the Supreme Court’s Rules of 1985.

The members of the panel assigned to review the appeals comprise justices Adamu Jauro, Uwani Musa Abba Aji, Lawal Garba, Helen M. Ogunwumiju, I.N. Saulawa, Tijjani Abubakar, and Emmanuel Agim.

Atiku Abubakar, in his appeal, contends that the Presidential Election Petitions Court made an error in dismissing his petition. He argued that they failed to sufficiently prove allegations of irregularities in the presidential election, the 25 percent requirement in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), a $60,000 forfeiture, and the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) failure to transmit polling unit results to the IREV using BVAS, as mandated by its laws and guidelines.

Furthermore, Atiku’s counsel, Chris Uche (SAN), has sought permission to file academic records, which he claims are forged, of his opponent, Tinubu.

Read also: Oborevwori vs Gbagi: Deltans react over Supreme Court judgement

On his part, Peter Obi is asserting that the tribunal’s rejection of the blurred results from 18,088 polling units amounted to a miscarriage of justice. Chichi Ojei, representing the APM, has raised concerns about the validity of Tinubu and his deputy, Kashim Shettima’s nominations for office.

Tinubu’s defense, as presented by his counsel, Wole Olanipekun (SAN), argues that Atiku’s petition amounts to an abuse of court process and lacks merit. Similarly, he describes Obi’s petition as lacking in substance and merit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *