Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mahmood Yakubu, did not show up at the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal on Thursday as ordered.
Chairman of the five-man panel, Justice Mohammed Garba, had on Wednesday ordered the INEC chairman to appear before the tribunal at 12pm on Thursday.
The INEC boss was asked to come along with the Resident Electoral Commissioner in Zamfara State, having been subpoenaed.
However, at about 11.50am on Thursday when the tribunal stood down the People’s Democratic Movement’s proceedings to prepare ruling in an application, neither Yakubu nor the Zamfara REC was in court.
Counsel to the candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar and the PDP, Chris Uche (SAN), drew the court’s attention to the directive made on Wednesday regarding the subpoena order on the INEC boss.
“Is the chairman here now?” Justice Garba asked counsel to INEC, Yunus Usman (SAN), in response to Uche’s request.
Usman, in response, assured the tribunal that they would comply with the court’s order before noon.
At the end of proceedings on the PDM’s petition, Uche again reminded the tribunal that the INEC boss was yet to appear in court.
Responding, Usman told the tribunal that the order of the court was to the “effect that documents should be produced, not that any person should appear before the tribunal”.
Usman further told Justice Garba that the order of the tribunal had been fully complied with, with the tendering of the said subpoenaed documents.
The documents which were brought to court were accompanied by a written letter to the chairman of the tribunal. Uche, while commending Usman for the efforts, however, requested for a copy of the letter to enable him ascertain if the documents were complete and same as the ones requested for.
Meanwhile, in a unanimous ruling on Thursday, the tribunal dismissed two applications filed by the Hope Democratic Party (HDP) for being incompetent, lacking in merit and an abuse of court processes. The first was an application filed by the petitioners seeking to amend their motion to reflect the statement of oath of the original witnesses to be called in support of their petition.
The tribunal in dismissing the application agreed with the respondents that the motion lacked merit and constituted an abuse of court processes.
The court had on June 25 granted request of the petitioners to carry out clerical correction in their processes before the tribunal but declined to allow them amend their witnesses statement on oath as well as call additional witnesses on the ground that such amendment would affect the petition already filed before the tribunal.
Chairman of the five-man panel, Justice Garba, said it was a misconception on the part of the petitioners that it granted their earlier application for the amendment to call additional witnesses.
While holding that no additional list of witnesses could be allowed to be brought in at that stage, the tribunal described the new application as a “surreptitious attempt to circumvent the earlier ruling of the court”.
“The current application is an abuse of court processes, it is lacking in merit, constitutes an abuse of court processes and it is hereby dismissed,” the panel held.
The court also dismissed another application, notice to contend, filed by the petitioners on the grounds that the application was alien to the law.
The petitioners had in the application urged the tribunal to declare them winner of the presidential election on the basis of a referendum held on February 16, 2019 wherein they claimed over 50m Nigerians voted in favour of the HDP and its presidential candidate, Ambrose Owuru.
The HDP asked the court to nullify the 2019 presidential elections due to Federal Government’s decision to postpone the election, adding it was “unconstitutional”.
Delivering ruling on the application, Justice Garba agreed with the submission of counsel to INEC, Yunus Usman, that the application is unknown to law and ought to be dismissed. The panel stated that its task as defined by section 239(1) A of the constitution is election-related and does not include referendum.
Accordingly, the panel held that the application falls short of election matter so the tribunal lacks jurisdiction to entertain the notice to contend. The panel in addition said the subject matter of the application constitutes a pre-election matter, which is outside the jurisdiction of the panel.
“Having regard to the defect of the notice to contend, it ought to be dismissed. It appears to be alien to the law. It is not supported by any of the laws. The court will not engage in matters outside election issues. Process filed is an aberration, it is an abuse of court processes and it is hereby dismissed,” the tribunal held.
The tribunal thereafter fixed Monday, July 22, for the commencement of hearing and trial of the petition by the party challenging the election of President Muhammadu Buhari.
Justice Garba announced the date at the end of the pre-hearing session in the HDP’s petition.
The court, while stating the rules for the hearing of the substantive petition, said petitioners shall have two days to present their case as well as the respondents.
The tribunal also allotted 10 minutes for examination, 15 minutes for cross-examination and five minutes for re-examination of witnesses, respectively.
The respondents shall have three days after the close of evidence to file their final addresses. The petitioners shall have three days after the service of the respective final addresses to file their own final presentations. The respondents shall also each have two days after the petitioners file their final address to file their replies on points of law.
FELIX OMOHOMHION, Abuja
