Connect with us

News

Atiku, Obi Plan Appeal As Election Tribunal Dashes Bid To Sack Tinubu

Published

on

The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Atiku Abubakar, and his Labour Party counterpart, Peter Obi, have rejected Wednesday’s judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal affirming the election of President Bola Tinubu.

The Legal Adviser to the Labour Party, Kehinde Edun, vowed to challenge the judgment at the Supreme Court.

Also, Atiku’s Lead Counsel, Chris Uche, SAN, said he had received instructions from his client to file an appeal at the Supreme Court.

He said “The judgment has been delivered but we have not received justice. Luckily, the law has given us leverage to go on appeal to the Supreme Court. We have instructions from our clients to go to the Supreme Court. The struggle continues.”

The PEPT which began sitting at 9.40am at the Court of Appeal, Abuja, ruled that the petition filed by Atiku and Obi and their parties had no merit and unanimously upheld Tinubu’s electoral victory in the February 25 presidential election

The five-member panel took turns to dismiss the petitions presented by Atiku and Obi against the declaration of Tinubu as the winner of the presidential election by the Independent National Electoral Commission on March 1, 2023.

The judgment was delivered by the Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Haruna Tsammani, assisted by other members of the panel-Justices Stephen Adah, Monsurat Bolaji-Yusuf, Moses Ugo and Abba Mohammed.

Delivering the death knell to Atiku’s petition on Wednesday night, Tsammani stated, “This petition accordingly lacks merit. I affirm the return of Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the duly elected President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The parties are to bear their cost.”⁣

The National Legal Adviser of the LP, Edun, expressed disappointment with the judgment, stressing that the tribunal was unfair to reject 10 of their 13 witnesses, adding that the decision weakened their case.

Edun said, “We already had a premonition that this might happen. For example, where the court was saying the statements of some key witnesses should have been filed along with the petitions. How can that be? Subpoena is an order of court by which the court has compelled a witness to come and give evidence before or as of the time you are filing the petition.

‘’This is because I have not assumed jurisdiction, the tribunal has also not assumed jurisdiction. We are just filing. It is only after filing that the court assumes jurisdiction, not before. So how can you file a witness statement at the time of filing the petition? It is when the court signs the subpoena.”

He explained, ‘’That subpoena is an invitation to the person indicating that the court has given him an order to come and give evidence. So, if the court has not ordered the person, how can he give any statement?

‘’This is why I said the judgment is so strange. And it is on the basis that they knocked out the evidence of 10 of our 13 witnesses, which inevitably weakened our case. It is a strange judgment.”

On the next point of action for the party, the legal adviser disclosed that the apex court will be the final arbiter.

“There are some filings that are unacceptable to us. So we need to see what the apex court has to say to this. We have to address this, not only for today, but for the sake of our jurisprudence. We want to see what the judges at the Supreme Court will say about all these. It is so important to do this for the sake of tomorrow.”

Delivering judgment earlier on Obi and LP’s petition marked CA/PEPC/03/2023, Tsammani said the petitioners failed to prove the allegations in their petition as required by the law and went ahead to knock off the planks of the case one after the other.

The tribunal held that although the petitioners alleged that the election was marred by irregularities, they, however, failed to give specific details of where the alleged infractions took place.

The court noted that whereas Obi and the LP insisted that the election was rigged in 18, 088 polling units across the federation, they were unable to state the locations of the said polling units.

In the verdict that was read for five hours, the tribunal further held that Obi’s allegation that fictitious results were recorded for the Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress by the Independent National Electoral Commission was not proved.

Moreso, it pointed out that the petitioners were unable to state the figures they claimed were reduced from the election results they garnered in different states of the federation, especially in Ondo, Oyo, Rivers, Yobe, Borno, Tabara, Osun and Lagos States.

It added that the petitioners equally failed to state the polling units where over-voting occurred or the exact figures of unlawful votes that were credited to Tinubu by the INEC.

It stressed that though Obi and LP said they would rely on spreadsheets as well as forensic reports and expert analysis of their expert witnesses, they failed to attach the documents to the petition or serve the same on the respondents as required by the law.

The court stated that though the petition contained serious allegations that bordered on violence, non-voting, suppression of votes, fictitious entry of election results and corrupt practices, Obi and his party, however, failed to give particulars of specific polling units where the incidents took place.

It held that several portions of the petition that contained the allegations were “vague, imprecise, nebulous and bereft of particular materials.”

Therefore, the court struck out paragraphs 9, 60, 61, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76, 77, 78, 83 and 89 of the petition.

“They failed to state the number of votes affected and the number of people disenfranchised. The determination of the election is about figures,” Justice Mohammed declared.

He further stated, “It is unimaginable that a petitioner will allege widespread rigging in 176,000 polling units, over 8,000 wards, 774 LGAs, 36 states and FCT without stating the specific place where the alleged irregularities occur.

“The law is very clear that where someone alleged irregularities in a particular polling unit, such person must prove the particular irregularities in that polling unit for him to succeed in his petition.

“Labour Party made generic allegations of irregularities and said they would rely on spreadsheets, inspection reports, and forensic analysis but the documents promised by the petitioners were not attached to the petition.”

Obi nomination validated

Nevertheless, the court dismissed the contention of the respondents-Tinubu and the APC-that Obi was not validly nominated by the LP to contest the presidential election.

It noted that the respondents had argued that Obi left the PDP on May 24, 2022 and joined the LP on May 27, 2022.

The respondents in its petition claimed that as of May 30, 2022, Obi was not a valid member of the LP and could not have duly participated in its presidential primary election.

They insisted that his name could not have been contained in the membership register of the LP, which ought to be submitted to INEC 30 days before the primary election was held.

However, the court held that the issue of membership is an internal affair of a political party, which is not justiciable.

It maintained that only the LP has the prerogative of determining its members, adding that the respondents were bereft of the legal authority to query Obi’s membership of the LP.

Likewise, the court held that contrary to contention by Tinubu and the APC, the petitioners were not under any obligation to join Atiku who came second in the election or his party, the PDP, in the case.

It noted that both Atiku and the PDP are not statutory respondents or necessary parties to the petition.

On the alleged $460,000 forfeiture made by Tinubu to the United States Government, Justice Tsammani said, “The petitioners have evidently failed to establish their allegation that the 2nd respondent is disqualified from contesting the presidential election under section 137 (1)(d) of the 1999 constitution because he was fined $460,000 by a district court in Illinois.

“The order of forfeiture in exhibit P5 on which the petitioners have relied does not qualify as a sentence of fine for an offence involving dishonesty or fraud within the formulation of section 137 (d) of the 1999 constitution.”

 

News

Ignore Fake February 2 Sit-at-Home Order, IPOB Lawyer Tells South-East Residents

Published

on

By

A human rights lawyer and lead counsel for the Indigenous People of Biafra, Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has urged South-East residents to completely ignore what he described as a “fraudulent” sit-at-home order allegedly scheduled for Monday, February 2, 2026, by a faction of the group.

Recall that the pro-Biafran group, through its spokesman Emma Powerful, had directed a sit-at-home on February 2 across the region in solidarity with traders at the Onitsha Main Market.

Powerful said the total shutdown in Biafraland is a direct, peaceful, and unified response to the actions of Anambra State Governor, Prof. Chukwuma Soludo, who ordered the closure of the Onitsha Main Market for one week.

But in a counter statement released on Saturday, Ejiofor said the source behind the directive, operating under the guise of “Emma Powerful,” has been compromised and is acting against the collective interest of Ndi-Igbo.

He insisted that IPOB has formally and decisively distanced itself from the false sit-at-home order and directed Ndi-Igbo to go about their lawful activities without fear.

The statement read in part: “Once again, the well-worn theatre of misinformation has opened its curtains, this time with a particularly lazy script and an insultingly predictable cast.

“Late yesterday, a report was widely circulated alleging that a total lockdown of Ala-Igbo had been ordered under the guise of a sit-at-home directive purportedly issued by ‘Emma Powerful,’ slated for Monday, February 2, 2026.

“Let it be stated clearly, unequivocally, and without ambiguity: this directive is fake, a phantom, a calculated falsehood.

“Upon careful inquiry and diligent verification, especially considering the delicate and hard-won calm presently returning to our homeland, it became glaringly obvious that the so-called ‘Emma Powerful’ platform has been fatally compromised.

“It has been hijacked by vested interests whose business model thrives on fear, disruption, extortion, and the cynical exploitation of vulnerable communities.

“The peaceful global movement of the IPOB has formally and decisively disowned this fabricated publication, categorically distancing itself from the false sit-at-home order and directing Ndi-Igbo to go about their lawful and normal activities without fear.

“Going forward, the message from IPOB is unmistakable: any publication attributed to ‘Emma Powerful’ should be treated with extreme suspicion, if not outright contempt.

“Frankly, one cannot but express astonishment, bordering on disbelief, that at such a critical juncture, when relative peace is cautiously resurfacing in Ala-Igbo, anyone would recklessly circulate information capable of reopening wounds and inviting criminal infiltration.

“History has taught us, at unbearable cost, what happens when fake directives fall into the hands of violent opportunists masquerading as enforcers.

“It is therefore no longer sufficient to merely advise our people to ‘ignore’ publications from this source. The time has come for greater clarity and firmness. The platform known as ‘Emma Powerful,’ in its current corrupted state, has positioned itself as an adversary to Ala-Igbo’s peace, progress, and collective well-being.”

According to Ejiofor, the peaceful global movement must go further by publicly and definitively explaining why this source has become unreliable, compromised, and hostile to the collective interest of Ndi-Igbo. Silence, ambiguity, or polite distancing, he said, only leaves room for further abuse.

“A masquerade that dances with fire should not be mistaken for a messenger of truth,” the statement concluded.

Continue Reading

News

Joint Task Force Crushes Terrorist Cells In North East, Heavy Weaponry Seized

Published

on

By

In recent operations across the North East, troops of the Joint Task Force Operation HADIN KAI (OPHK) have neutralized scores of terrorists and recovered a significant cache of arms and ammunition.

Lieutenant Colonel Sani Uba, Media Information Officer, Headquarters Joint Task Force (North East) in a statement said intelligence has confirmed the killing of JULAIBIB, a top ISWAP commander operating within the Gujba axis of the Timbuktu Triangle, during an encounter around Kimba, Damboa LGA of Borno State, on 30 January 2026.

According to the statement, the elimination of the terrorist leader has thrown ISWAP elements in the area into disarray, with several fighters reportedly neutralised during the operation.

In a related operation, troops of OPHK, working in collaboration with the Civilian Joint Task Force, neutralised 3 terrorists during a well-coordinated ambush between Ngazalgana and Lamusheri communities in Borno State.

It said the operation followed credible intelligence on insurgent movements in the area, as troops laid an ambush along the identified route and engaged the terrorists with effective firepower, resulting in the neutralisation of 3 insurgents, while others fled with gunshot injuries.

The statement said troops recovered two AK-47, adding that the operation forms part of sustained efforts to deny terrorists freedom of movement and degrade their operational capabilities across the Theatre.

It said troops also recorded multiple successes in Adamawa State, adding that on 29 January, 2026, troops responded swiftly to a distress call from Barama community, Mubi North LGA, foiling an armed robbery attempt. Two armed robbery suspects attempting to attack a student of the Federal Polytechnic, Mubi, were arrested. One suspect sustained a gunshot wound to the thigh while attempting to confront the troops and was evacuated to the Federal Medical Centre, Mubi, for treatment.

The suspects were subsequently handed over to the Nigeria Police for further investigation. Items recovered include 3 cutlasses, 2 laptops, 4 mobile phones, and one power bank.

 

Continue Reading

News

Appeal Court Affirms Death Sentences for Five Offa Bank Robbery Convicts

Published

on

By

The Court of Appeal sitting in Ilorin, Kwara State has affirmed the death sentences passed on five 2018 Offa robbery convicts.

The court dismissed their appeals as lacking merit.

The Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) in the state, Mohammed Akande, who witnessed the proceedings, said that the three Appeal Court judges unanimously agreed on the judgement and affirmed the verdict of the state High Court condemning the five persons to death by hanging.

“The Court of Appeal, Ilorin Division comprising of Hon. Justice Ridwan Maiwada Abdullahi JCA, Hon. Justice Gabriel Kolawole JCA and Hon. Justice Abdul Dogo today, Friday affirmed the judgment of Hon. Justice H. A. Saleeman of the Kwara State High Court, that sentenced the Appellants: Niyi Ogundiran, Salawu Azeez, Ibikunle Ogunleye, Ayoade Akinnibosun and Adeola Abraham to death by hanging for the involvement in the Offa Bank Robbery”.

Another official of the Court also said that the appellate court rejected all the grounds of appeal filed by the convicts and ordered their immediate return to prison custody.

“The court dismissed all their grounds of appeal and upheld their convictions. They have been taken back to prison,” the official said.

The official said that the arguments raised at the Court of Appeal were unconvincing and may not succeed if repeated at the apex court.

It is recalled that Ayoade Akinnibosun, Azeez Salahudeen, Niyi Ogundiran, Ibikunle Ogunleye and Adeola Abraham were convicted of armed robbery, illegal possession of firearms and culpable homicide.

A sixth suspect, Michael Adikwu, a retired police officer, died in custody before the commencement of the trial.

At least 32 people were killed, including nine police officers, two of whom were women, making it one of the deadliest bank robberies in Nigeria’s history.

Justice Haleemah Saleeman of the Kwara State High Court had earlier sentenced the five convicts to death by hanging after a trial that lasted about six years and attracted nationwide attention.

In her judgment, which lasted over four hours, Justice Salman held that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

She said the convicts “acted contrary to the law and allowed their connections with those in power at the time to lead them astray”.

In addition to the death sentence, the trial court also sentenced them to three years’ imprisonment for illegal possession of firearms, in line with provisions of Nigeria’s penal laws.

Lead prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), described the appellate court’s decision as thorough and well considered, despite the prolonged delays that characterised the trial.

On the defence side, Abdullah Jimba, counsel to one of the convicts, said that preparations were underway to pursue a final appeal at the Supreme Court.

 

Continue Reading

Trending