NewStats: 3,261,387 , 8,173,871 topics. Date: Thursday, 29 May 2025 at 06:17 AM 5g56w

The All Progressives Congress (APC), on Monday, asked the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja to dismiss the petition filed by the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, against the emergence of Bola Tinubu as the president-elect in the 25 February election.

The APC, the 4th respondent, urged the PEPC to reject the petition in its notice of preliminary objection marked: CA/PEPC/03/2023 and filed at PEPC’s Secretariat, Monday night, by Thomas Ojo, a member of the party’s legal team led by Lateef Fagbemi in Abuja.

The party asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost on the grounds that it lacked merit and was frivolous.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mr Obi, the 1st petitioner, and LP, the 2nd petitioner, had sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and APC as 1st to 4th respondents respectively.

The petitioners are seeking the nullification of the election victory of Messrs Tinubu and Shettima in the 25 February presidential poll.

NAN reports that while former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) came second with 6,984,520 votes in the election. Mr Obi came third with 6,101,533 votes.

Atiku and the PDP are also challenging the outcome of the poll.

In the petition marked: CA/PEPC/03/2023 filed by Mr Obi and LP’s lead counsel, Livy Ozoukwu, they contended that Mr Tinubu “was not duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the time of the election.”

The petitioners claimed there was rigging in 11 states, adding that they would demonstrate this in the declaration of results based on the ed results.

Mr Obi and LP said INEC violated its own regulations when it announced the result despite the fact that at the time of the announcement, the totality of the polling unit results had yet to be fully scanned, ed and transmitted electronically as required by the Electoral Act.

Among other prayers, the petitioners urged the tribunal to “determine that, at the time of the presidential election held on February 25, 2023, the 2nd and 3rd respondents (Tinubu and Shettima) were not qualified to contest the election.

“That it be determined that all the votes recorded for the 2nd respondent in the election are wasted votes, owing to the non-qualification of the 2nd and 3rd respondents.

“That it be determined that on the basis of the remaining votes (after discountenancing the votes credited to the 2nd respondent) the 1st petitioner (Obi) scored a majority of the lawful votes cast at the election and had not less than 25 per cent of the votes cast in each of at least two-thirds of the states of the federation and the FCT and satisfied the constitutional requirements to be declared the winner of the Feb. 25 presidential election.

“That it be determined that the 2nd respondent (Tinubu), having failed to score one-quarter of the votes cast at the presidential election in the FCT was not entitled to be declared and returned as the winner of the presidential election held on Feb. 25.”

Responding, the APC asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that Mr Obi, the 1st petitioner, lacked requisite “locus standi” to institute the petition because he was not a member of LP at least 30 days to the party’s presidential primary to be validly sponsored by the party.

It said: “The 1st petitioner (Obi) was a member of PDP until May 24, 2022.

“1st petitioner was screened as a presidential aspirant of the PDP in Apni 2022.

“1st petitioner participated and was cleared to contest the presidential election while being a member of the PDP.

“1st petitioner purportedly resigned his hip of PDP on May 24, 2022 to purportedly the 2nd petitioner (Labour Party) on May 27, 2022.

“2nd petitioner conducted its presidential primary on May 30, 2022 which purportedly produced 1st petitioner as its candidate, which time contravened Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act for him to contest the primary election as a member of the 2nd petitioner.”

The party argued that Obi was not a member of LP at the time of his alleged sponsorship.

The APC argued that “by the mandatory provisions of Section 77 (1) (2) and (3) of the Electoral Act 2022, a political party shall maintain a and shall make such available to INEC not later than 30 days before the date fixed for the party primaries, congresses and convention.”

It stated further that all the PDP’s presidential candidates were screened on 29 April 29, an exercise Mr Obi participated in and cleared to contest while being a member of the party.

It argued that the petition was incompetent since Mr Obi’s name could not have been in LP’s made available to INEC at the time he ed the party.

The APC equally argued that the petition was improperly constituted having failed to Atiku Abubakar and PDP who were necessary parties to be affected by the reliefs sought

“By Paragraph 17 of the petition, the petitioners, on their own, stated that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar came second in the presidential election with 6,984,520 votes as against the petitioners who came third with 6,101,533 votes;

“At Paragraph 102 (ii) of the petition, the petitioners urged the tribunal to determine that 1st petitioner scored the majority of lawful votes without ing Alhaji Atiku Abubakar in the petition.

“For the tribunal to grant prayer (iii) of the petitioners, the tribunal must have set aside the scores and election of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar,

“Alhaji Atiku Abubakar must be heard before his votes can be discountenanced by the tribunal,” it said.

The party said the petition and the identified paragraphs were in breach of the mandatory provisions of Paragraph 4(1)(D) of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022.

According to APC, Paragraphs 60 — 77 of the petition are non-specific, vague and/or nebulous and thereby incompetent contrary to Paragraph 4(1)(d) of the Ist Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022.

It said that the allegations of non-compliance must be made distinctly and proved on a polling unit basis but none was specified or provided in any of the paragraphs of the petition.

“Paragraphs 59-60 of the petition disclose no identity or particulars of scores and polling units supplied in 18,088 units mentioned therein,” it added.

The party, therefore, argued that the tribunal lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain pre-election complaints embedded in the petition as presently constituted, among other arguments.

The APC urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost as the same was devoid of any merit and founded on frivolity.

https://www.timesng.com/news/592693-tinubu-apc-asks-election-tribunal-to-dismiss-obi-lps-petition-gives-reasons.html

The battle begins. Bola Tinubu and APC have entered the ring. They entered on technical ground. An attempt at technical knock-out, at first round!

Ok

APC said that PO should go to court. Now that PO is in court you want the judge to dismiss the case?


Never!

Clevite:
The battle begins. Bola Tinubu and APC have entered the ring. They entered on technical ground. An attempt at technical knock-out, at first round!

That's their best approach but it's lame and no bearing what so ever

May the best lawyers win for their parties. Election Tribunals are part of the Democratic process,I believe everyone will have an opportunity to prove their case before the Honourable Judges.
This year's Presidential tribunal judges will really have their hands full.
2 parties are arguing they won the election,meaning after Labour and PDP are able to prove APC lost the election,they still have to prove their opponent didn't win.
Another 2 parties want the Tribunal to cancel the presidential Election because the electoral body didn't comply with its guidelines.
So if PDP and Labour prove ApC didn't win the election,and also argue they are the winner,the other 2 parties can pour sand into their garri by showing proof the Election didn't comply and therefore have the Election cancelled.
...........
This is really confusion breaking the bones of the Honourable Judges on the Election Tribunal.
Na wa for Nigeria political parties........
God bless Nigeria

Good. It pretty well covers the basics.

Responding, the APC asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that Mr Obi, the 1st petitioner, lacked requisite “locus standi” to institute the petition because he was not a member of LP at least 30 days to the party’s presidential primary to be validly sponsored by the party.

It said: “The 1st petitioner (Obi) was a member of PDP until May 24, 2022.

“1st petitioner was screened as a presidential aspirant of the PDP in April 2022.

“1st petitioner participated and was cleared to contest the presidential election while being a member of the PDP.

“1st petitioner purportedly resigned his hip of PDP on May 24, 2022 to purportedly the 2nd petitioner (Labour Party) on May 27, 2022.

“2nd petitioner conducted its presidential primary on May 30, 2022 which purportedly produced 1st petitioner as its candidate, which time contravened Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act for him to contest the primary election as a member of the 2nd petitioner

We are watching

See nonsense APC and Tinubu filed against Obi, I pity them

This is going to be an exciting battle 😁

Penguin2:
Lol

Finally they have come with their watery defense.

Now, let the trials begin.

Meanwhile, I well meaning Nigerians to call for expedited hearing of the case. We should have a ruling before May 25th at the latest.

We can’t let Tinubu to be sworn in and hope that he’d let the courts be impartial.

We, sane Nigerians, say NO to a drug lord as our president.

Only criminals, thieves, idiots and vagabonds would want a drug lord as their president.

At the minimum, one would expect some of you to be reasonable and discerning.

A primary school kid should know that it is impossible to conclude an election petition case in three months let alone in a month and half.

Tinubu is our president for the next 4 years at the minimum.

The hunter is now the hunted.

They asked for it and now they can't withstand the heat...


Even though this is all a formality to act like they're afraid when in real sense, they've already pocketed the judicial system....


Tinubu has put everything in order to win by all means, but God will shame him and bring him down!!

Hahahahahaha!

I love the fact that APC has taken Obi back to PDP where he belongs.

When Labour Party finally get a true presidential candidate, they can then come back to challenge Tinubu.

RighChannel:
We are watching

See nonsense APC and Tinubu filed against Obi, I pity them

You should pity Obi who doesn't even know the party he belongs to

Gbam, The Pandora fraud should also be fined N10b for presenting a frivolous case and time wasting ,

The electoral law is simple, but since the Pandora fraud is a 3rd class graduate of UNN, he would not understand what the electoral law means as amended.

How can you be a ed member of PDP and still went ahead to run an election under Labour Party.

Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act is simple and unambiguous.

Truly , Obi is a trader to trader 3rd class graduate

Penguin2:
Lol

Finally they have come with their watery defense.

Now, let the trials begin.

Meanwhile, I well meaning Nigerians to call for expedited hearing of the case. We should have a ruling before May 25th at the latest.

We can’t let Tinubu to be sworn in and hope that he’d let the courts be impartial.

We, sane Nigerians, say NO to a drug lord as our president.

Only criminals, thieves, idiots and vagabonds would want a drug lord as their president.

Watery to you. Please can you fault any of the points raised in the response?

ingShot:

At the minimum, one would expect some of you to be reasonable and discerning.

A primary school kid should know that it is impossible to conclude an election petition case in three months let alone in a month and half.

Tinubu is our president for the next 4 years at the minimum.

Oga the law should was amended to make sure electoral cases are concluded within 180 days.

President Tinubu till 2027

Clevite:
The battle begins. Bola Tinubu and APC have entered the ring. They entered on technical ground. An attempt at technical knock-out, at first round!

Very expected but smart move.

Start with the technical details. If Obi survives it, then make minced meat of his useless petition.

The party asked the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost on the grounds that it lacked merit and was frivolous.

Serous cost for wasting everybody’s time.


The APC equally argued that the petition was improperly constituted having failed to Atiku Abubakar and PDP who were necessary parties to be affected by the reliefs sought

“By Paragraph 17 of the petition, the petitioners, on their own, stated that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar came second in the presidential election with 6,984,520 votes as against the petitioners who came third with 6,101,533 votes;

“At Paragraph 102 (ii) of the petition, the petitioners urged the tribunal to determine that 1st petitioner scored the majority of lawful votes without ing Alhaji Atiku Abubakar in the petition.

“For the tribunal to grant prayer (iii) of the petitioners, the tribunal must have set aside the scores and election of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar,

“Alhaji Atiku Abubakar must be heard before his votes can be discountenanced by the tribunal,” it said.


This point alone has destroyed Peter Obi’s petition. The quacks who filed Obi Obi’s petition will be sweating after reading this technical point. Wole Olanipekun is damn good in destroying cases on technical grounds.

To delusional obedients, it’s game over. Obi’s watery case has been shredded to pieces.

kcnwaigbo:

Oga the law should was amended to make sure electoral cases are concluded within 180 days.

So, as the law has not been amended for such, it has to be done in this case?

And in reality, it is not possible to conclude election matters in three months after the election. IMPOSSIBLE!

In a nutshell, APC forced Obi back to PDP where he belongs.

So he doesn't have any capacity to challenge them from Labor party. Labor part votes wasted!

I love this drama..

Roboto11:
Responding, the APC asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that Mr Obi, the 1st petitioner, lacked requisite “locus standi” to institute the petition because he was not a member of LP at least 30 days to the party’s presidential primary to be validly sponsored by the party.

It said: “The 1st petitioner (Obi) was a member of PDP until May 24, 2022.

“1st petitioner was screened as a presidential aspirant of the PDP in April 2022.

“1st petitioner participated and was cleared to contest the presidential election while being a member of the PDP.

“1st petitioner purportedly resigned his hip of PDP on May 24, 2022 to purportedly the 2nd petitioner (Labour Party) on May 27, 2022.

“2nd petitioner conducted its presidential primary on May 30, 2022 which purportedly produced 1st petitioner as its candidate, which time contravened Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act for him to contest the primary election as a member of the 2nd petitioner

Peter Obi will be thought a lesson never to corrupt our political process with desperate ticket hunting.

Yet the hypocrite talks about the process, unbeknownst to him that he is the anomaly of the process.

He wants to challenge an organic candidate like Tinubu? He must be very delusional.


Labour Party had no candidate in the presidential election.

Case closed.

JASONjnr:
They asked for it and now they can't withstand the heat...


Even though this is all a formality to act like they're afraid when in real sense, they've already pocketed the judicial system....


Tinubu has put everything in order to win by all means, but God will shame him and bring him down!!

Accepting defeat before the battle.

Fire for fire..Obi wasn't eligible to contest for any election in Labour party..
Has Obi not laboured in vain like this?

mrvitalis:

That's their best approach but it's lame and no bearing what so ever

Many of you are legally illiterate. If you know the law, you will see that their counter argument is very strong and compelling. How can Obi contest election when he was not a member of LP? How can Obi claim irregularities without giving evidence on polling unit basis? Answer those questions based on the law.