While we wait to continue the Peter Obi's case (CA/PEPC/03/2023) at the PEPT later today at 2pm, I decided to update you on all the documents submitted so far at the tribunal.
On Day 1 of the Hearing, Peter Obi tendered documents from the US District Court...
Showing evidence of the forfeiture of $460,000 by the 2nd Respondent (Tinubu).
Moving to Day 3 (1st June), Peter Obi moved to the tendering of PUBLIC DOCUMENTS duly certified by INEC. This they also did on Day 4 (2nd June).
Now let's look at these documents...
On Day 3 alone, Certified True Copies of Forms EC8A from 115 LGAs of 6 states were tendered. The states include Rivers, Benue, Cross-River, Niger, Osun and Ekiti.
All the respondents (INEC, Tinubu, Shettima and APC) objected to the tendering of each of these documents.
The court, however, admitted the Forms EC8As of these 115 LGAs into evidence and marked them accordingly.
On Day 4, Certified True Copies of Forms EC8A from 136 LGAs of 8 states were tendered. Documents from 7 LGAs were additions to States tendered on Day 3 (Rivers and Niger).
The 8 states include Rivers, Niger, Adamawa, Bayelsa, Oyo, Edo, Lagos, Akwa-Ibom.
All the respondents (INEC, Tinubu, Shettima and APC) objected to the tendering of each of these documents.
The court, however, admitted the Forms EC8As of these 136 LGAs into evidence and marked them accordingly.
The hearing of Day 3 & 4 brought all the INEC documents of Forms EC8As tendered to 251 LGAs of 12 States.
🙂🙂🙂
EXTRA: For Readers...
I've prepared a SUMMARY of Day 3 & 4 in a very simple and understandable way. I've also prepared details of the documents tendered so far.
For the summary of yesterday and today's proceedings, in PDF and Voice-overs, keep tabs on my account and @_weyimi as we will be making them available before the end of the day.
It is presumed that the Petitioners in CA/PEPC/03/2023 will today, take a step away from INEC CTC...
of Forms EC8As and proceed to tendering documents of Forms EC8Bs, which are Ward Collated Results from the various states they will be contending in the petition.
While these are presumptions, join us in court or stay glued to know the turn out of events.
Mr. Saturday is in court already, even though it's a Friday. Man is looking too good to be representing the Respondent.
Anyways, I'm in court too, with my dear elder brother @realevabest, please follow him. I want to appear as Amicus Curiae today 😏😏 But I forgot my wig & gown.
- Awa Kalu SAN leads the Petitioners Team
- AB Mahmoud leads the 1st Respondent Team
- Wole Olanipekun leads the 2nd & 3rd Respondent Team
- LO Fagbemi leads the 4tg Respondents Team
A certain SAN (name withheld) was told to keep his phone outside before accessing the court. He simply looked, hissed & went in with his phone without being stopped. 😂😂😂
People are seated in court and carried out civil disobedience to the rule of keeping their phones outside.
Amina JSC of the Supreme Court in the PDP suit against Shettima held that the principles in Nwosu v APC (2019) cannot apply for 2 reasons:
1. That Nwosu was nominated by two parties 2. That Nwosu participated in two primaries but Shettima participated in one
I TOTALLY DISAGREE!
The provisions of S. 35, Electoral Act 2022 is in no different from S. 37, Electoral Act 2010 which applied to the Nwosu case.
ON THE FIRST REASON:
The law is clear that a CANDIDATE stands voided if he is nominated by:
a. More than one party
b. In more than one constituency...
It is clear by this provision that whether multiple nomination was done by multiple parties or done in multiple constituencies, such candidate stands voided and can never participate in an election.
Nwosu's case was in two parties, Shettima's case was in two constituencies...