THE Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on Friday offered explanations to its objection to the tendering of INEC-certified electoral documents brought to court by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi to prove their case against President Bola Tinubu’s victory in the February 25, 2023 presidential election.
While lawyers to parties in the suits had agreed at the pre-hearing sessions of the tribunal meant to streamline the procedures for hearing the substantive petitions not to object to certified true copies of electoral documents obtained from INEC, INEC’s counsel, Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, Tinubu’s counsel, Wole Olanipekun, SAN, and Lateef Fagbemi, APC’s counsel all however objected to the admissibility of the certified true copies of election documents tendered by the petitioners.
At the proceedings on Friday, one of INEC’s counsel, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, explained that the petitioners – Atiku and Obi, did not challenge the conduct of the election in the areas relating to the documents that were presented before the court.
According to him, “Issues were not joined in the local government areas where the result sheets were sought to be tendered before the court” and as a result wrong of the petitioners to go beyond the areas where the polls are being challenged.
Pinheiro accused Obi and the Labour Party of mixing up issues by bringing result sheets from places where they did not dispute the election outcome. He also argued that the local government areas allegedly smuggled into court proceedings are “strange to the petition and cannot stand in the face of the law.”
As a result, the respondents said they would articulate their objections in written addresses at the close of arguments in the petitions.
Reacting to the objection to the admissibility of the electoral papers, Obi’s lead lawyer, Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, expressed shock at INEC’s comment.
Chairperson of the five-person panel, Justice Haruna Tsammani, faulted Pinheiro’s explanation concerning the objection to the admissibility of the documents. He recalled that all lawyers to parties in the petitions had agreed to give such explanations at the address stage of proceedings.
Pinhero apologised to the court after Justice Tsammani’s intervention, explaining that he was compelled to speak up owing to the barrage of media criticisms that trailed their objection to the tendering of the documents.
Meanwhile, one of Obi’s counsel, Peter Afoba, SAN, tendered additional electoral documents from 21 local government areas of Adamawa State and eight local government areas of Bayelsa State and parts of Rivers and Niger states, all of which were admitted by the court.
