Eschew Prejudicial Public Analysis, Presidential Tribunal Warns Lawyers

The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) has assured
all parties in the four petitions pending before it of
fairness.

But the tribunal warned lawyers not to make comments on the
proceedings.

The petitioners are seeking to void the outcome of the February
23 presidential election, won by the incumbent President Muhammadu
Buhari and his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC).

The President of the Court of Appeal (PCA), who is heading the
tribunal’s five-man panel, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, gave the
assurance yesterday while speaking at its inaugural sitting, held
at the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal.

Justice Bulkachuwa said: “We assure all stakeholders that each
litigant will be given equal opportunity to present his case in a
mature manner before us.

“As we gather in this honourable courtroom today, I wish to use
this opportunity to reassure Nigerians and friends of Nigeria, that
the Court of Appeal will work in accordance and within the dictates
of the Constitution, the law and international best practices,to
dispense justice to all, without fear or favour, affection or ill
will.”

She sought the cooperation of all, particularly the senior
lawyers in the cases, and warned that the court will penalise
infractions.

Justice Bulkachuwa said there are 786 petitions,with Imo State
having the highest number, 76 which necessitated the posting of six
panels to the state.

The PCA noted that, of all the states where elections were
conducted, it is only in Jigawa that petitions were not filed.

Justice Bulkachuwa, who stressed the importance of an
independent judiciary in a democracy, noted that the challenge of
electoral outcomes was part of the democratic culture.

She said: “This is not the first time this court has been
empowered to hear and determine the outcome of a presidential
election result since the return to democracy in Nigeria and the
coming into effect of the 1999 Constitution.We did same in 1999,
2003, 2007 and 2011.

“Whenever petitions are filed against a person returned by the
Independent National Electoral Commission as President, such a
court is set up and it becomes a matter of public interest to the
nation.

“The judiciary, being the arbiter, there are litigants, counsel,
members of the press, and the public who are all stakeholders as
the major participants.

“We, therefore, require the maximum cooperation of all the
stakeholders, especially from the leaders of the Bar.

“We expect the proceeding to be conducted with decorum, a high
sense of responsibility, dedication, and patriotism in our quest to
arrive at just decisions in all the petitions before us.

“We are witnesses to what has been happening in high profile
cases where such cases are being discussed and publicly decided
prematurely in both the social and electronic media before the
announcement of the verdict by the court.

“We pray that this time would be an exception for the benefit of
the nation. We don’t expect counsel to any of the parties to hype
the polity after any sitting by making a public analysis in the
media as to what transpired in court.

“These proceedings should be treated as would any other
low-profile case, where proceedings in court are not discussed
publicly until a decision is pronounced by the court.

“This admonition is also extended to the parties, their
respective counsel and the members of the press.

“We, on our own part, will make relevant information available
as at when due. Any breach will not be condoned and we will not
hesitate in taking necessary action against such offenders.

“The independence of the judiciary is key to any vibrant
democracy, especially in the resolution of election petitions.
Therefore, an independent judiciary is a robust and an
indispensable requisite of a free society under the rule of
law.”

At the conclusion of Justice Bulkachuwa’s address, lawyers to
parties in the various petitions took turns to pledge cooperation
with the tribunal in its task of ensuring justice.

Wole Olanipekun (SAN), who represented Buhari, Lateef Fagbemi
(SAN), for the APC, Yunus Usman (SAN) for INEC and Livy Uzoukwu
(SAN), for Atiku and the PDP promised to abide by the tribunal’s
rules and ensure rancour free proceedings.

The tribunal mentioned all the four petitions, one at a time.
The first was the one filed by Hope Democratic Party (HDP) and
Ambrose Owuru, who claimed to be the party’s presidential
candidate.

HDP and Owuru are pleading with the court to void the
presidential election on the grounds that their names and logo were
omitted by INEC.

When the petition was mentioned, lawyers to parties identified
all the documents (processes) they filed, following which the
tribunal adjourned till May 14 for the pre-hearing session.

When the petition filed by the PDP and Atiku was called, the
lawyers identified their processes. The tribunal chose May 15 and
16 for the pre-hearing session.

The tribunal also mentioned the other two petitions by the
Coalition for Change (C4C) and Geff Ojinika; by the People’s
Democratic Movement (PDM) and Pastor Aminchi Habu – but found that
parties had not concluded serving each other what they filed.

It did not choose any day for the pre-hearing session in both
petitions.

Dressed in black traditional attire, PDP’s vice presidential
candidate Peter Obi and INEC’s National Commissioner and Head,
Legal Services, Mrs. May Agbamuche-Mbu, witnessed the
proceedings.

While the tribunal’s proceedings lasted, some women, dressed in
black t-shirts, with the inscription: “Bring back our mandate”,
stood outside the tribunal’s sitting venue, bearing placards.

One of them, who did not want to be identified, said: “We are
here to protest the failure of the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC) to obey the order of this court, granting leave
to the PDP and Atiku to inspect materials used for the February 23
election.”

Another of the over 40 protesting women claimed that INEC was
yet to obey the order made by the court on March 7.

As the woman spoke, others shouted: ”Bring back our democracy”;
“People are dying”; “We can no longer go to our farms”; and
“Lawyers bring back our democracy”.

Messages in their placards and banners, include: “The
presidential election is a charade for APC”; “INEC obey court order
and release election materials as ordered by the court to Atiku and
PDP,” “Declare Atiku winner,” “#Bring back our mandate 2019#”.

Subscribe ToNairalaw News!