Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate, Mr Atiku Abubakar, have made good their vow to exercise their right of appeal, as they formally approached Supreme Court to set aside judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.

The tribunal had dismissed their petition against the result of the February 23, 2019, election that returned President Muhammadu Buhari for a second term in office.

The appeal, predicated on 66 grounds, claims judgment of the tribunal occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

But in a swift reaction, All Progressives Congress (APC) dismissed the decision of PDP and Atiku to go to the Supreme Court as a needless distraction.

APC’s National Auditor, Mr George Moghalu, said though Atiku is expressing his fundamental right as enshrined in the constitution, it would have been better to allow President Muhammadu Buhari administration concentrate.

“It did not come as a surprise to us because Atiku has the right to exercise his fundamental right. But I have always advised that we should avoid distracting the running of the Federal Government with further letigations. I know certainly that he and his party may not see it as distraction, but I want to appeal for their understanding,” he said.

In their appeal, PDP and Atiku  claimed the tribunal erred in law “when they relied on ‘overall interest of justice’ to hold that the second respondent’s Exhibits R1 to R26, P85, and P86 were properly admitted in evidence.”

They also alleged, among other things, that the tribunal erred in law “when they held thus: ‘My firm view is that Section 76 of the Electoral Act is clearly inapplicable to the issues under consideration. The form referred to are the form to be used in the conduct of the election as Form CF001 had been taken care of in Section 31 of the Electoral Act and the said Form CF001 is tied to the steps laid down in the said Section 31 of the Electoral Act.’

Atiku and PDP also alleged that the tribunal erred in law when the judges held thus: ‘There was/is no pleadings in the petition to the effect that second respondent’s failure to attach his certificates to Form CF001 amounts to lack of educational qualification to contest the election.

“In other words, the issue of failure to attach certificates, which have been flogged throughout the length and breadth of the petitioners address(es) in reply to first, second and third respondents’ final written address is not the case of the petitioner in the pleadings. No issue was joined on non-production of certificates or failure to attach them as an infraction of sections 131, 137 and 138 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended.’

“The learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they relied on ‘overall interest of justice’ to hold that the second respondent’s (Buhari) Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were properly admitted in evidence.”

They further contended that, “The learned justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they held as follows: “The reasonable inference or plausible meaning attachable to the above provision of Electoral Act 2010, as amended, is that a candidate can list information concerning evidence of his qualifications or other relevant information about himself. The demand or information required in Form CF001 cannot be more or higher than the statutory requirements.

“‘All submissions about the failure to produce certificates or attach same to CF001 is hereby discountenanced. Even if it can be said that the submissions made are in tandem with the Petitioners Pleadings on issues 1 and 2 the fact remains that none of the facts pleaded were proved or established as required by law.”

It is also the claim of the appellants that the judgment of the tribunal was not based on the issues canvassed by the petitioners, especially in relation to the respondent’s academic qualifications.

“Take, for instance, one of the respondent’s witnesses, Mr Paul Tarfa, a rtd major-general, called by Mr Buhari’s lawyers said that they did not give their qualifications to the Military Board. Tarfa’s testimony is against the claim by Buhari that the Nigeria military is in possession of his certificates.

“Secondly, Buhari said that he was recruited into the military in 1961 and Tarfa said in 1962, so what is the correct date of his recruitment into the army. Somebody is not telling the truth.

“The issue in question is who entered the different grades for him from both the Cambridge and the West African School Certificate results. This is the first time that the court will say that the documents are admitted in the interest of justice. So, who entered the different grades for him and if he did it, why?”

Another ground of appeal is that the President’s Chief of Staff, Mr Abba Kyari, brought the Cambridge documents dated July 18 and testified on July 20.

The appellants are also claiming that the WAEC documents contradicted the Cambridge documents, describing it as a case of forgery and inconsistency in documents.

The appellants are also praying the apex court to hold that the tribunal erred in its decision and consequently set the tribunal’s judgment aside and go ahead to grant all the reliefs sought.

Atiku and his party, PDP had dragged Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) before the tribunal for declaring Buhari as winner of the Feb. 23 presidential election.

Mentioned as respondents are the electoral umpire include Buhari and his party, All Progressives Congress (APC).

In the petition filed on March 18, the petitioners amongst other things alleged that INEC in connivance with agencies of the ruling government manipulated the outcome of the poll in favour of Buhari.

Atiku and PDP in the petition therefore urged the tribunal to nullify the emergence of Buhari on grounds of alleged Irregularities, rigging, substantial non compliance with the electoral provisions amongst others.

Among the grounds the petitioners were seeking the nullification of Buhari’s election was that the president lied on oath in his form CF001 submitted to INEC for his clearance for the election.

The president had claimed that he possessed three certificates namely, Primary School Certificate, West African School Certificate (WASC) and Officers Cadet Certificate but unlike others did not attach copies of any of the certificates to support his claim.

They therefore prayed the tribunal to declare them winner of the February 23 presidential election.

But the tribunal in its judgment on September 11, 2019 dismissed the petition for being incompetent and lacking in merit.

The tribunal resolved all issues raised by the petitioners in favour of Buhari, adding that the president did not lie but indeed possessed the mandatory qualification and even much more to contest for the presidential election.

While arguing that the failure of Buhari in not attaching the said certificates in his form CF 001 did not amount to not having the certificates, Justice Garba held that there is no law that requires the attachment of certificates to the form CF001 submitted to INEC to aid his clearance for the February 23 presidential poll.

“It is established that a candidate is not required under the Electoral Act to attach his certificate to his Form CF001 before a candidate is adjudged to have the requisite qualification to contest the election.”

The tribunal in his conclusion on the issue said both oral and documentary evidence before it proved that Buhari has more than secondary school certificate required to contest the election.

“Second respondent has more than secondary school certificate having attended various courses. He is not only qualified, he is eminently qualified”, the tribunal said.

Dissatisfied, the petitioners had approached the apex court to reverse the judgment of the tribunal.

They are therefore asking Supreme Court to set aside the judgment of the tribunal and grant the prayers sought by them.

Sun