President Bola Tinubu and his party, the All Progressive Congress (APC), have closed their defence in Peter Obi’s suit challenging Tinubu’s victory at the Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja.
Obi of the Labour Party came third in the 25 February presidential election, but he is urging the court to overturn Tinubu’s victory on account of electoral fraud and non-compliance with statutory provisions in the conduct of the poll.
Tinubu and the APC had on Wednesday opened their defence after Obi finished presenting his own case on 23 June,
Tinubu, APC and Nigeria’s electoral commission, INEC, are respondents in the suit.
They have closed their defence, marking the end of the trial.
It also sets the case for its next phase, which is exchanging final written and addresses among parties, and a day for closing arguments.
At Wednesday’s proceedings, Tinubu’s lead lawyer, Wole Olanipekun, tendered volumes of documents to defend the president’s mandate.
Key among the tendered documents were academic records of Tinubu from Chicago State University in the US, details of the president’s Nigerian passport and a clearance letter from the US Embassy in Nigeria to the Nigeria Police Force.
The letter from the US Consular General in Lagos dated 4 February 2003 revealed that Tinubu had no record of criminal conviction or arrest in the US.
The five-member panel of the court headed by Haruna Tsammani admitted the documents in evidence despite opposition from Obi’s lawyer, Livy Uzoukwu.
INEC’s lawyer Abubakar Mahmoud and APC’s lead counsel, Lateef Fagbemi, did not object to the admissibility of the documents.
Witness
After the documents were admitted and marked as exhibits, Olanipekun, called Tinubu’s first and only witness.
The star witness, Michael Bamidele, a senator, while being led in evidence by Olanipekun, told the court that Obi was not a genuine member of the Labour Party at the time he vied for Nigeria’s presidency.
A membership register of the Labour Party in Anambra State, Obi’s home state, Southeast Nigeria, was earlier tendered in evidence to buttress the allegation.
Under cross-examination by Fagbemi, Bamidele, who represents Ekiti Central at the Nigerian Senate, said, “There can be no criminal conviction of anyone without a charge in the US.”
Bamidele, who was called to the New York Bar since January 1999, was apparently referring to Tinubu, whom Obi and Atiku’s Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party, alleged he was convicted and forfeited 460,000 dollars in drug-related offences in the US.
Disagrees with ECOWAS election report on violence
However, Bamidele, who is the leader of the current Senate, disagreed with a portion of the ECOWAS election observation mission report concerning widespread violence during the recent general elections.
Under cross-examination by Uzoukwu, Bamidele attributed cases of killings and arson in Nigeria’s Southeast region to the grisly activities of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).
The separatist group has been waging a struggle against the Nigerian state, demanding a declaration of the State of Biafra.
In his testimony on Wednesday, Bamidele blamed IPOB for the brutal killing of a senatorial ticket-holder in Enugu, a few days before the presidential and National Assembly elections on 25 February.
This was after Uzoukwu drew Bamidele’s attention to the ECOWAS report on the outcome of the general elections.
“I agree with the conclusion, but I disagree with that part of the ECOWAS election observation mission report concerning widespread violence during the polls,” Bamidele told the court.
“I attribute the killings in Enugu of the Senatorial candidate to IPOB activities,” he added.
After Bamidele concluded his testimony, he was discharged from the witness box.
Olanipekun then went on to tender the tons of documentary evidence led by his team, adding that Bamidele’s witness had “covered the field in the case.”
Subsequently, Olanipekun informed the court that his client’s defence had ended.
Toeing Olanipekun’s line of submission, APC’s lawyer, Fagbemi, adopted the evidence led by Tinubu’s legal team as theirs.
“There is no need to subject your Lordships to the torture of sitting and writing in long hand. Therefore, we have established our case through the 2nd respondent (Tinubu).
“We have called evidence, but we are not calling any witness,” Fagbemi told the court.
Case set for closing arguments
Following the conclusion of their defence, chairman of the five-member court, Tsammani, said, “The respondents shall have ten days to file their final written addresses, while the petitioner shall have seven days to reply.”
Tsammani added that the parties should be notified of when the hearing would resume for the adoption of their final written addresses.
PT
