• Tuesday, May 14, 2024
businessday logo

BusinessDay

Labour Party files appeal at the Supreme Court

2027 presidency: Why Peter Obi must temper his expectations

The Labour Party ( LP) on Tuesday filed an appeal at the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal( PEPT) that dismissed its application challenging the declaration of President Bola Tinubu as the winner of the February 25 Presidential election

Read also Labour party rejects tribunal judgement, to announce next move

The Court had in the ruling on the petition stated that the petitioners made generic allegations of irregularities against the respondent without specifying the polling units, amongst the several reasons adduced for throwing out the petition

The appeal marks the final legal battle for the Contentious February 25th, 2023 Presidential Election, according to Obiora Ifoh, the National Publicity Secretary, of the Labour Party.

Obi and LP’s team of lawyers led by Livy Uzokwu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), beat the deadline for the filing of the Appeal and are approaching the apex court on 51 grounds, which they termed an error in law to prove that the All Progressives Congress, APC Presidential Candidate in the election, Bola Ahmed Tinubu did not win the election

The appellants said that it was wrong for both INEC and the PEPC to declare him winner of the election when many incontrovertible points were proving otherwise.

In their reliefs, Obi and the Labour Party sought from the Apex Court four key points: Allow the Appeal, set aside the perverse Judgment of the PEPC, and grant the Reliefs sought in the petition, either in the main or in the alternative.

On the issue of the 25% requirement for Abuja, Obi and the Labour Party listed the particulars of error by the PEPC as follows.

That the PEPC failed to appreciate that for the President to assume the office or position of the Governor of Abuja, is also under a mandate to secure 25% of the votes cast in the FCT.

They also accused the PEPC of overlooking the fuller purport of section 299, which will be more glaring on a calm examination of section 301 of the constitution.

No date yet has been fixed for the hearing of the case.