Controversy: Atiku’s camp questions Tinubu’s watermark on PEPC judgment copy

A heated debate ensued on Saturday between the camps of the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the February 25, 2023 presidential election, Atiku Abubakar; and that of President Bola Tinubu, over the watermark of the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team on the viral copy of the judgment of the Presidential Elections Petition Court.

The PEPC had on Wednesday upheld the election of the President who contested on the platform of the All Progressives Congress, after a 12-hour judgment on the appeals arising from the presidential election. Atiku and Peter Obi of the Labour Party had rejected the court’s verdict, vowing to appeal to the Supreme Court.

On Friday, a copy of the Certified True Copy of the court’s judgment circulated online, bearing the watermark of the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team. This sparked suspicion and criticism from some commentators, especially social media users, who suggested a sinister motive behind it.

On Saturday, Atiku’s camp joined those who faulted the appearance of the watermark on the viral CTC.

In a statement issued by the Special Assistant on Public Communications to the former Vice President, Mr Phrank Shaibu, the camp demanded an explanation from the PEPC on how and why the watermark of the President’s legal team appeared on the CTC.

The statement read in part, “After causing a needless delay in availing the PDP presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, and his legal team Certified True Copy of its judgment, the PEPC must explain to Nigerians and the world ambiguities around why copies of the judgment bear the header of the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team.

“It is not our intention to stir up controversy on the matter, but the PEPC needs to tell Nigerians why it chose to affix the header of the respondents on the CTC copy of their judgment, whereas the copies that went to the petitioners did not have the same.

“Was that because the Tinubu legal team is deemed to be accorded special privileges? The court must explain!

“It is very clear that many questions are begging for answers, including why the PEPC decided to avail the respondents, especially the Tinubu legal team to have a first receipt of the CTC of the judgment before the plaintiffs.”

Shaibu said Nigerians would want to know why the PEPC conferred special privileges on the Tinubu legal team by making them have first custody of copies of the judgment, even though it was more urgent for the petitioners who needed the document to cause an appeal to the Supreme Court within 14 days.

He added, “Unfolding developments after the court’s ruling elicit suspicions about whether or not the Tinubu Legal Team provided clerical services to the PEPC. Otherwise, how and when did the ‘Tinubu Presidential Legal Team’ creep into a document that was supposed to be the official document of the Court of Appeal of Nigeria?

“‘Tinubu Presidential Legal Team’ on the top left-hand corner of all the 798 pages is neither a monochrome nor a metadata. It is a header, meaning that except for a valid explanation, the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team is the originator of the document.

“The PEPC must, on its honour, clarify why the court chose to put the header of the Tinubu Legal Team on a CTC copy of its judgment document, while the only emblem that should have been on the document is the stamp of the Court of Appeal of Nigeria.”

President’s team reacts

Meanwhile, the Coordinator of the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team, Babatunde Ogala, in a statement on Saturday dismissed the critics for insinuating the watermark was a result of pre-determined manipulations, saying there was nothing untoward to it.

He also said the PDP collected the first copy of the judgment and not the President’s team contrary to Shaibu’s claim.

Ogala said his team watermarked their copy of the judgment after collection from the Court of Appeal before circulating the scanned copies to members of their team.

The statement read in part, “We are surprised by the fuss over our watermark on our copy of the judgment. It is a common practice among lawyers to watermark their documents for easy identification and reference. There is no ulterior motive behind it.

“We obtained our copy of the judgment from the Court of Appeal after paying the required fees and following due process. We then scanned and watermarked our copy before sending it to our team members. We did not interfere with or tamper with the content or authenticity of the judgment.

“We also wish to correct the false impression that we received our copy before the petitioners. The truth is that the petitioners collected their copy before us. We have evidence to prove this.

“We urge the public to disregard the baseless allegations and insinuations of the petitioners. They are only trying to divert attention from the substance of the judgment, which affirmed the mandate of the President.”

However, the controversy has raised questions about the transparency of the court process and the need for greater safeguards to protect the integrity of judicial decisions.

The PEPC has said that it is investigating the matter, and that it will take appropriate action if any wrongdoing is found. However, the controversy is likely to cast a shadow over the court’s decision, and could undermine public confidence in the judicial system.

In addition to the controversy over the watermark, the PEPC’s decision to delay the release of the CTCs to the petitioners has also been criticized. The petitioners, who include Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, have argued that the delay has given the Tinubu camp an unfair advantage in preparing their appeal to the Supreme Court.

The PEPC has said that the delay was due to technical reasons, but the petitioners have accused the court of bias. The controversy has further eroded public confidence in the judicial process.

The debate over the watermark and the delay in releasing the CTCs is a reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in the judicial system. The public has a right to be confident that the courts are fair and impartial, and that judicial decisions are not influenced by political or personal considerations.

The PEPC must take steps to address the concerns that have been raised, and to ensure that the integrity of the court process is protected. This includes investigating the matter of the watermark and taking appropriate action if any wrongdoing is found. The court must also ensure that the CTCs are released to the petitioners in a timely manner, so that they can prepare their appeal to the Supreme Court.

Newsflash Nigeria is an online newspaper that is developed and written exclusively for Nigerians. It’s packed with up-to-the-minute Local and National Economy News, Share & Capital Market, Health, Sports, Education, Technology, Business and Opinions.

To make further advert enquiries or place an order, please contact us at [email protected] and +2348053316946 and WhatsApp number 08033546732