Abuja, May 22, 2023 – The Allied Peoples Movement (APM) announced today its intention to bring forward only one witness in its bid to establish the claim that the President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), was not the valid winner of the 2023 presidential election. The APM, currently challenging the election outcome, conveyed its position through its lawyer, Mr. S. Abubakar, before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja. Abubakar further stated that the party would present ample documentary evidence to substantiate its petition against the President-elect.
During the court session, Mr. Abubakar disclosed that representatives from the involved parties held a meeting last Saturday to agree on various procedural aspects to be adopted during the case hearing. Among the agreed modalities was the allocated time for the examination-in-chief of witnesses. According to the consensus, star witnesses would be given 20 minutes to testify, followed by a 25-minute cross-examination, and finally, a 5-minute re-examination period.
The petitioner’s counsel also informed the court that the parties agreed to exchange schedules of documents to be relied upon and that the reports of expert witnesses should be filed and served at least 48 hours before the hearing. Abubakar emphasized the centrality of documentary evidence to their petition and stressed the necessity of furnishing all relevant documents, including expert reports, to the involved parties ahead of the hearing date.
In response, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) confirmed that it would require one day to present its sole witness. The APC, on the other hand, requested five days to call at least one witness, with the possibility of summoning additional witnesses through subpoenas. The President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, expressed his intention to call three witnesses, while the 5th respondent, Aminu Masari, announced that he would also bring forward one witness regarding the matter.
APM’s petition, marked as CA/PEPC/04/2023, primarily contends that the withdrawal of Mr. Ibrahim Masari, who was initially nominated as the Vice-Presidential candidate of the APC, invalidated Tinubu’s candidacy based on Section 131(c) and 142 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended. The party argues that there was a three-week gap between Masari’s expression of withdrawal, the subsequent withdrawal of his nomination, and Tinubu’s purported replacement of him with Senator Kashim Shettima. APM asserts that Tinubu’s candidacy had lapsed by the time he nominated Shettima as Masari’s replacement.
According to the petitioner, when Tinubu announced Shettima as the Vice Presidential candidate, “he was no longer in a position, constitutionally, to nominate a running mate since he had ceased to be a presidential candidate of the 2nd Respondent, having regard to the provisions of Section 142 of the 1999 Constitution.” Furthermore, APM argues that Masari’s initial nomination triggered the joint ticket principle enshrined in the Constitution, and his subsequent withdrawal invalidated the said joint ticket.
Consequently, APM petitioned the court to declare that Shettima was not qualified to contest as the Vice-Presidential candidate of the APC as of February 25, the date of the election conducted by INEC, due to a violation of the provisions of Section 35 of the Electoral Act, 2022. The party seeks an order nullifying and voiding all votes credited to Tinubu in the presidential election based on his alleged non-qualification as an APC candidate. Additionally, APM
Comments are closed.