Hearing of the petition filed by the Allied Peoples Movement challenging the victory of President Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) will resume on Friday May 9, 2023.
The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) made the decision at the instance of the petitioners, who requested more time to take a stance on the status of their petition.
The APM is alleging that Tinubu was not qualified to run for the presidential office because according to it, he did not have a validly nominated vice president, hence, he was not validly sponsored by the APC.
The party has joined the Independent National Electoral Commission, the APC, Bola Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and Kabir Masari.as respondents in the petition.
It said “the third respondent lost his candidacy and was no longer qualified to contest the presidential election. When the fifth respondent withdrew his nomination as the 2nd respondent’s vice presidential candidate for his said presidential election.”
The PEPC on Tuesday, May 30 shifted the APM’s petition to Friday, June 2, 2023, in response to an observation by a counsel for the president, Wole Olanikpekun.
Olanikpekun reminded the court of a recent judgement of the Supreme Court, which, according to him, appears to have resolved the same issue the APM has brought before the court.
He referred the court to the Supreme Court’s decision of Friday, May 26, which dismissed the Peoples Democratic party (PDP’s) suit which asked the court to nullify the ticket that produced the president and his vice president on grounds of double nomination.
Olanipekun demanded to know if the apex court decision does not affect the case of the APM, which is also challenging the outcome of the election on the grounds of using a placeholder, Kabir Masari, for Shettima.
He said, “We are aware that the Supreme Court gave a decision on this same matter in the yet-to-be-reported judgement SC/CV/501/20223 and the parties involved were Peoples Democratic Party versus INEC and three others, where the apex court resolved all the issues.
“We promise within the next two days that the certified true copies of the judgement of the Supreme Court will be made available.
“And we will also discuss with the petitioners whether, in light of the decision of the Supreme Court, there will still be the need to continue with this petition.”
The APM’s counsel, Sheehu Abubakar, however, requested for a short time to avail themselves of the judgement to aid their decision.
He said, “Based on the submission of the learned silk, we shall be praying to adjourn the hearing of this petition to enable us to apply to the Supreme Court for the copy of the judgement referred to, to enable us to examine the same and know the effect it has on this petition.”
The court granted his request and adjourned APM’s hearing to June 2nd.
At the resumed hearing on Friday, counsel for the 3rd and 4th respondents, Lateef Fagbemi, argued that they have yet to lay hands on the said judgement.
Counsel for the APM similarly told the court that the copy of the Supreme Court’s judgement is not yet available to enable them to “take a stance on the status of the petition.”
“May we respectfully request an adjournment to enable us to take a position on the status of the petition.”
The five-man panel of the court granted their request following the agreement of all the respondents.
