Bola Tinubu, the newly declared winner of the 2023 presidential election, has issued a warning to the Presidential Election Tribunal regarding the requirement to obtain 25% of the votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja. Tinubu argues that this constitutional requirement should not be the basis for annulling the election.
The Independent National Electoral Commission declared Tinubu as the winner with 8,794,726 votes, while Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi came in second and third place, respectively. However, Atiku and Obi, along with their parties, have challenged the election results by filing petitions to the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.
One of the arguments brought forth is that Tinubu did not secure 25% of the valid votes cast in the FCT, as mandated by the Nigerian Constitution. Tinubu only received 19% of the votes in the FCT.
To defend against this claim, Tinubu’s lead counsel, Wole Olanipekun, emphasizes that there is no superiority between the votes from populous states like Lagos and Kano, and less populous states like Bayelsa, Ebonyi, and Ekiti. Olanipekun points out that the Constitution treats the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, “as if” it is a state, based on Section 299.
Annulling the election solely due to one state’s results would be unjust and chaotic, according to Olanipekun. He urges the court to understand that residents of the FCT do not have any special voting rights over residents of other states. Any other interpretation would go against the legislature’s intention.
The Presidential Election Petition Court has reserved judgement on the petitions by Atiku and Obi, as well as the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), which seeks to nullify Tinubu and Kashim Shettima’s victory. The judgement in the APM petition will be delivered alongside the other judgments.
During the proceedings, Atiku presented 27 witnesses and numerous documents, while Obi called 13 witnesses. However, the credibility of the witnesses and documents has been challenged. Tinubu’s counsel argues that the petitioners focused on the non-electronic transmission of results, but lacks familiarity with the country’s electoral laws.
Tinubu stands firm in his defense of the election results and hopes that the court will rule in his favor, rejecting the petitions brought against him.
Tinubu Warns Presidential Election Tribunal: Voters in Federal Capital Territory Shouldn’t Be Treated Differently Than Those in Other States
Resident Bola Tinubu is standing up against the possible annulment of the 2023 election due to his failure to secure 25% of the votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja. He argues that the constitutional requirement should not disregard the votes from the FCT, as they are not more special than those in other states. Tinubu obtained 19% of the FCT votes, falling short of the required percentage.
Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, along with their parties, have challenged the election outcomes by filing petitions to the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal. One of their arguments is that Tinubu did not meet the 25% requirement in the FCT, as outlined in the Nigerian Constitution.
Tinubu’s lead counsel, Wole Olanipekun (SAN), argues that there should be no superiority between votes in populous states like Lagos and Kano, and less populous states like Bayelsa, Ebonyi, and Ekiti. He emphasizes that the Constitution treats the FCT as if it were a state, and nullifying the election because of one state’s failure would be absurd.
The judgement on the petitions is pending, with the Allied Peoples Movement’s (APM) petition to nullify Tinubu and Kashim Shettima’s victory in the 2023 election being reserved to be delivered alongside the judgements about Obi and Atiku Abubakar’s petitions. Atiku presented 27 witnesses, and Obi called 13 witnesses and submitted several documents, including over 18,000 blurred result sheets.
Tinubu’s counsel argues that the petitioners’ case revolves around the non-electronic transmission of results, urging the court to dismiss the petitions due to their lack of familiarity with electoral laws. The credibility of witnesses and documents have been challenged by INEC, Tinubu, and the APC.
