Tinubu Opposes Consolidation Of Petitions
THIS year’s presidential election petitions court has ruled that there will be no live broadcast of proceedings.
This was the ruling of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), sitting in Abuja on Monday, Mat 22 against live coverage of the tribunal on Monday.
The Justices held that televising the proceedings has no relevance to the petitions and that it is not rooted in any of Nigeria’s laws.
Recall that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, the Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, had filed an application on May 8 for an order to allow the live coverage of the daily court proceedings on the case they brought against the president-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, following the February 25 election.
At the proceeding in Abuja on Monday, Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Haruna Tsammani, dismissed the application for lacking merit.
Meanwhile, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its presidential candidate in the election, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, has opposed the consolidating of the petitions as raised by the PEPC.
At the resumed hearing to consider the matter of consolidation, Counsel to Tinubu, Mr. Akin Olujimi (SAN) and the APC, Mr. Charles Edosomwan (SAN) opposed the move to consolidate the three different petitions, insisting that doing so would affect their ability to effectively defend all the issues raised by the petitioners.
They maintained that the petitioners did not only raise various issues, but were seeking different reliefs.
Mr. Shehu Abubakar announced appearance for the Allied Peoples Party (APM) and Mr. Kenny Pinhero (SAN) represented the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Abubakar said the party would not be opposed to consolidation of the petition, while Pinhero added that he was neither in support nor opposition, but left the decision at the discretion of the PEPC, as the electoral body was neutral on the issue.
Olujimi, in opposing the application for consolidation of the petitions, said the interest of justice would not be served, as the issues raised were different and because of the variance of pleadings, adding: “The justice factor is a good reason for your Lordships not to consolidate the petition. The 2nd respondent is afraid of being prejudiced.”
He submitted that the 3rd and 4th respondents also opposed consolidation of the petitions and adopted the submissions of Counsel to the 2nd respondent, insisting that though Paragraph 50 of 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022 donated an in built discretion to the court, he argued that such discretion was not mandatory.
“The interest of justice should be a restraint on the power of court to exercise discretion in granting consolidation. The issue canvassed in each of the petitions vary,” Olujimi insisted.
For the 5th respondent, Mr. Rowland Otaru adopted the submissions of Counsel for the 2nd to 4th respondents.
