A senior lawyer, Joseph Otteh, on Thursday, described the Presidential Elections Presidential Tribunal Judgment delivered on Wednesday as hugely disappointing.
He said the judgment would damage efforts to ensure that, going forward; elections in Nigeria are better conducted and produced credible and fair outcomes.
Otteh, in an exclusive chat with one of our correspondents, stated that he wasn’t taking any position on whether the candidate whose election was challenged was legally qualified to contest for the office of President of Nigeria, but noted that only PEPT simply “buried its head in the sand,” using exponential levels of legal technicalities to defeat public expectations that it would actually conduct a credible interrogation of the February 25 presidential election process.
He said, “The judgment has very little to commend it as it did not factor in the long struggles to reform the electoral process, the reforms adopted to reduce electoral fraud, and how BVAS and IREV played into that strategy.
“It also failed to acknowledge the importance of transparent elections and of maintaining the integrity of votes cast at elections, nor consider how the introduction of technology (such as BVAS and IREV) was geared towards improving transparency and increasing public confidence in election outcomes.
“The PEPT simply treated the technological reforms as though they had no value, function, or purpose and were totally meaningless, reducing them to sterile, discretionary additions.
“Once again, the PEPT has dashed hopes for a better Nigeria, and it is our hope that the judgment will not represent the ultimate reality of what Nigerians are faced with.”
Also, the Global Coordinator of Rescue Nigeria, Dr Michael Chukwujekwu, said in a statement on Thursday in Asaba that the action of the judges had put democracy in Nigeria under serious threat.
“RNGN observed that the Tribunal judges, who were meant to uphold justice as unbiased umpires in the Nigerian presidential election petitions and contentions, openly and vigorously became players in a game they are meant to be referees in.
“Evidentially, the ruling as transmitted and recorded showed somewhat 100 per cent support for some particular teams in the game they are umpires in.
“The body language, mannerisms, expressions, choice of words, and accusations of the petitioners left nothing to wonder. ‘Are the judges the defence counsels of APC and INEC?’ From the beginning of the judgement till the end, the tribunal judges were seen and recorded defending the actions of the APC and the INEC.
“All criticism meted were only at the witnesses and expert witnesses of the Labour Party and PDP. There are no criticisms of the statements and submissions of the APC and INEC witnesses.”
They said that the panel of judges did not also consider the effect of the one-sided approach and ruling on the citizens, democracy, as well as the patriotic faith and future of Nigeria.
Another group, Network for Advocacy and Good Leadership Initiative, in a press statement signed by its Director General, Dr Agodi Kanu, added that the amount awarded against the political parties meant bad governance and rascality taken too far.
The statement partly read, “More worrisome are the bogus costs awarded against these political parties for seeking legitimate justice, which is bad governance and judicial rascality taken too far. These are sad developments, and we call for a holistic review of these rulings by the Supreme Court.
“NAGLI firmly believes that this judgment, delivered by Honourable Justices, has fractured our constitution and democracy and set a detrimental precedent for future elections in Nigeria, as the electoral umpire on her own did not keep to her prescribed guidelines and procedures for the conduct of the 2023 presidential election.
The group urged the apex court to right the perceived wrong done by the tribunal for the good of the country, adding that they remain committed to a better Nigeria.
He said, “The judgment has very little to commend it as it did not factor in the long struggles to reform the electoral process, the reforms adopted to reduce electoral fraud, and how BVAS and IREV played into that strategy.
“It also failed to acknowledge the importance of transparent elections and of maintaining the integrity of votes cast at elections, nor consider how the introduction of technology (such as BVAS and IREV) was geared towards improving transparency and increasing public confidence in election outcomes.
“The PEPT simply treated the technological reforms as though they had no value, function, or purpose and were totally meaningless, reducing them to sterile, discretionary additions.
“Once again, the PEPT has dashed hopes for a better Nigeria, and it is our hope that the judgment will not represent the ultimate reality of what Nigerians are faced with.”
Also, the Global Coordinator of Rescue Nigeria, Dr Michael Chukwujekwu, said in a statement on Thursday in Asaba that the action of the judges had put democracy in Nigeria under serious threat.
“RNGN observed that the Tribunal judges, who were meant to uphold justice as unbiased umpires in the Nigerian presidential election petitions and contentions, openly and vigorously became players in a game they are meant to be referees in.
“Evidentially, the ruling as transmitted and recorded showed somewhat 100 per cent support for some particular teams in the game they are umpires in.
“The body language, mannerisms, expressions, choice of words, and accusations of the petitioners left nothing to wonder. ‘Are the judges the defence counsels of APC and INEC?’ From the beginning of the judgement till the end, the tribunal judges were seen and recorded defending the actions of the APC and the INEC.
“All criticism meted were only at the witnesses and expert witnesses of the Labour Party and PDP. There are no criticisms of the statements and submissions of the APC and INEC witnesses.”
They said that the panel of judges did not also consider the effect of the one-sided approach and ruling on the citizens, democracy, as well as the patriotic faith and future of Nigeria.
Another group, Network for Advocacy and Good Leadership Initiative, in a press statement signed by its Director General, Dr Agodi Kanu, added that the amount awarded against the political parties meant bad governance and rascality taken too far.
The statement partly read, “More worrisome are the bogus costs awarded against these political parties for seeking legitimate justice, which is bad governance and judicial rascality taken too far. These are sad developments, and we call for a holistic review of these rulings by the Supreme Court.
“NAGLI firmly believes that this judgment, delivered by Honourable Justices, has fractured our constitution and democracy and set a detrimental precedent for future elections in Nigeria, as the electoral umpire on her own did not keep to her prescribed guidelines and procedures for the conduct of the 2023 presidential election.
The group urged the apex court to right the perceived wrong done by the tribunal for the good of the country, adding that they remain committed to a better Nigeria.
