The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, in
the last general election, Atiku Abubakar, has vowed to overturn
verdict of the Presidential Elections Petitions Tribunal, PEPT, in
favour of President Buhari.
Towards this end, lawyers of Atiku have concluded plans to file a
70-point appeal at the Supreme Court on Monday, September 23rd 2019 to
beat Wednesday’s deadline.
Thisdaylive.com, quoted one of Atiku’s lawyers to have said: “We will
file latest on Monday, September 23, and at most, due to any
unforeseen reason, by September 24. Bear in mind that the deadline for
submission is Wednesday. We won’t file on Wednesday for tactical
reasons.”
According to the source, one of the 70 grounds of appeal is that “the
judgement of the PEPT was based on the facts; the judgement was not on
the issues presented to the Court of Appeal presidential tribunal by
the petitioner, especially in relation to the respondent’s academic
qualifications.”
“Take, for instance, one of the respondent’s witnesses, Major General
Paul Tarfa (rtd), called by President Muhammadu Buhari’s lawyers said
that they did not give their qualifications to the Military Board.
Tarfa’s testimony is against the claim by Buhari that the Nigeria
military is in possession of his certificates.
“Secondly, Buhari said that he was recruited into the military in 1961
and Tarfa said in 1962, so what is the correct date of his recruitment
into the army. Somebody is not telling the truth. The issue in
question is who entered the different grades for him from both the
Cambridge and the West African School Certificate results. This is the
first time that the court will say that the documents are admitted in
the interest of justice. So, who entered the different grades for him
and if he did it, why?
“One of the grounds of appeal is that the President’s Chief of Staff,
Abba Kyari, brought the Cambridge documents dated July 18 and
testified on July 20. The point here is that it was not pleaded, when
the respondent replied to the petitions of Atiku. So, speaking as in
point of law, you don’t speak on documents not pleaded.
“The WAEC documents contradicted the Cambridge documents. This is a
case of forgery, inconsistency in documents.” The lawyer added, “On
the INEC server, the judgement of the PEPT said the INEC server was
hacked and we then asked, which of the servers was hacked?
“The tribunal judgement was based on the Electoral Act section 52 (1)
(B), but this aspect of the law has since been deleted in 2015. It is
no longer in existence. This was the case in Wike Vs Peterside. If the
judgement said INEC server was recklessly hacked, then, there is a
server and, therefore, a criminal offence. Yet, INEC did not claim so
or that its documents were stolen. How come the judge reached this
scandalous decision?
“If section 52 (1) (B) is no longer in existence, how come the lead
judgement came to this decision? It was not based on the documents
pleaded. Therefore, how come it was decided so? That means that the
judge went on a voyage of discoveries and exploration. Buhari was not
accused of forgery. Rather, he was accused of lying, when he said the
army was in possession of his documents
“In his form CF001, he presented an affidavit, instead of his
certificates. PEPT relied on the CV presented. We are asking, is that
supposed to be so? CV is basically to show working experience. No
Primary School certificate. The judgement was based on inferences. The
judge simply inferred.
“We are surprised that the PEPT went the way it did. It is our view
that the judges would have gone further to help improve our electoral
laws as well as use it to commence the reform of the electoral laws.
So, these are some of the issues that form the grounds of the 70
points of appeal at the Supreme Court.”
