Tinubu, APC oppose Atiku’s move to use INEC staff as witnesses in election petition

tiku seeks to use INEC staff as witnesses to prove electronic transmission of results, but Tinubu and APC object.

Patrick OdeyJune 8, 2023

2 minutes read

President Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) have expressed strong opposition to former Vice President Abubakar Atiku’s attempt to use ad-hoc staff from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as witnesses in his challenge against Tinubu’s win in the 2023 presidential election.

Atiku, who was the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the election, had subpoenaed three INEC ad-hoc workers to share their firsthand experiences from the presidential election held on February 25.

He wanted them to explain how the election results were transmitted electronically, which he claimed was different from what INEC announced.

However, Tinubu and the APC, represented by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, raised objections against the statements given under oath by the witnesses to be presented at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

Tinubu and the APC argued that Atiku had not included these statements in his initial petition, which they said violated the Electoral Act 2022 and the rules of the court.

Olanipekun, SAN, citing multiple legal provisions, contended that since Atiku, as the petitioner, had subpoenaed the witnesses, he should have attached their sworn statements to his petition.

Olanipekun appealed to the court to reject the witnesses and dismiss their statements, saying they were irrelevant and inadmissible.

Cameroonian Okada Riders Protest Fuel Subsidy Removal in Nigeria (Video)

The arguments made by Tinubu and the APC against the subpoenaed witnesses were also supported by Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, representing INEC.

In contrast, Atiku’s lead counsel, Chris Uche SAN, urged the court to disregard the objections, calling them misplaced and misconceived.

He claimed that these objections were a deliberate ploy by Tinubu, the APC and INEC to delay and frustrate the proceedings.

Uche argued that it would have been impossible to include the statements of the subpoenaed witnesses with the petition because they hadn’t been summoned when the petition was filed.

He also argued that the statements of the witnesses were relevant and admissible because they corroborated his case that there was an electronic transmission of results.

While the court initially paused to deliberate, upon resumption, the Presiding Justice of the Court, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani, announced that the ruling on the objections would be reserved till a later date.

However, Justice Tsammani ordered that the testimony of the three subpoenaed witnesses should be heard and that Tinubu and his co-respondents be allowed to cross-examine them.