Connect with us

Featured

Ahead PEPT Sitting, PDP, Atiku, Apply for Live Broadcast

Published

on

As the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, kick-starts hearing on Monday, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, have filed an application for an order to allow live coverage of day-to-day proceedings on the case they brought against the President-elect, Bola Tinubu.

Atiku, who came second in the presidential election that held on February 25, in the motion he filed through his team of lawyers led by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, specifically applied for; “An order, directing the Court’s Registry and the parties on modalities for admission of Media Practitioners and their Equipments into the courtroom”.

The PDP candidate and former Vice President contended that the petition he lodged against the President-elect, was “a matter of national concern and public interest”.

He argued that the case involved citizens and electorates in the 36 States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, who he said voted and participated in the presidential poll.

More so, he drew attention of the court to the fact that the International Community is equally interested on issues pertaining to Nigeria’s electoral process.

In the motion dated May 5, Atiku and the PDP insisted that their case against Tinubu, being a unique electoral dispute with a peculiar constitutional dimension, they said it was a matter of public interest in which millions of Nigerian citizens and voters are stakeholders, with the constitutional right to be part of the proceedings.

“An integral part of the constitutional duty of the Court to hold proceedings in public is a discretion to allow public access to proceedings either physically or by electronic means.

“With the huge and tremendous technological advances and developments in Nigeria and beyond, including the current trend by this Honourable Court towards embracing electronic procedures, virtual hearing and electronic filing, a departure from the Rules to allow a regulated televising of the proceedings in this matter is in consonance with the maxim that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done.

“Televising court proceedings is not alien to this Honourable Court, and will enhance public confidence”, the petitioners added.

Atiku had in his joint petition with the PDP, marked: CA/PEPC/05/2023, applied for the withdrawal of the Certificate of Return that was issued to Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.

He maintained that the declaration of Tinubu as winner of the presidential election was “invalid by reason of non- compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022”.

Atiku further argued that Tinubu’s election was invalid by reason of corrupt practices.

“The 2nd Respondent was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the Election.

“The 2nd Respondent was at the time of the Election not qualified to contest the Election”, Atiku added while listing grounds he said the court should consider to nullify Tinubu’s election.

He prayed the court to declare him winner of the presidential election, having secured the second highest number of lawful votes cast at the election.

However, in a reply he filed through his team of lawyers led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Tinubu, queried the legal competence of petitions seeking to invalidate his election victory.

In a preliminary objection he entered before the court, Tinubu, described Atiku as a consistent serial loser that had since 1993, crisscrossed different political parties, in search of power.

The President-elect said he would during the hearing of the petition, lead evidence before the court to show how Atiku’s emergence as a candidate in the presidential election that held on February 25, led to the “balkanisation” of the opposition PDP.

Insisting that he was validly returned as winner of the presidential election by INEC, Tinubu told the court that unlike Atiku, he has been “a most consistent politician, who has not shifted political tendency and alignment.”

On the claim that he did not secure the statutory vote from the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, Abuja, Tinubu, argued that it was not a mandatory requirement of the law that he must win the FCT before he would be declared as the President-elect.

He said Atiku’s call for his election to be nullified on the ground that he was mandatorily required to score one-quarter of the lawful votes cast in each of at least two-thirds of all the States and the FCT, “becomes suspect and abusive, when considered vis-à-vis relief 150(d), where the petitioners pray that the 1st petitioner who did not score one-quarter of the votes cast in more than 21 States and the FCT, Abuja, be declared the winner of the election and sworn in as the duly elected President of Nigeria”.

It will be recalled that INEC had on March 1, announced Tinubu as the winner of the presidential poll, ahead of 17 other candidates that contested the election.

It declared that Tinubu scored a total of 8,794,726 votes to defeat Atiku who polled a total of 6,984,520 votes and Obi who came third with a total of 6,101,533 votes.

Aside from Atiku and the PDP, the Labour Party, LP, and its own candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, who came third at the election, are equally before the court to nullify Tinubu’s election.

A three-member panel of the PEPC which will conduct its proceedings at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, will on Monday, commence pre-hearing session on all the petitions that were brought before it by aggrieved presidential candidates and their political parties.

The Vanguard

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

El-Rufai to Remain in ICPC Custody Till June

Published

on

By

Justice Darius Khobo of the Kaduna State High Court has adjourned the bail hearing of former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, to the first week of June, 2026.

El-Rufai is being arraigned on multiple charges bordering on alleged financial crime and abuse of office by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

“Similarly, another charge, number KDH/KAD/ICPC/01/26, against Mallam Nasir El-Rufa’i and one Amadu Sule (LEDA) has also been filed before a Kaduna State High Court in the Kaduna Judicial Division,” the ICPC said last month.

“The charges in the State High Court case range from abuse of office, fraud, and intent to commit fraud to conferring undue advantage, among others. Both charges were filed by the ICPC on the 18th of March, 2026.”

Speaking after the court session, counsel to the former governor, Ukpon Akpan, kicked against the lingering adjournment of the bail hearing by one presiding judge as politically motivated.

The high-profile case has drawn significant public attention, with heightened security presence observed around the court premises.

The former governor had arrived at the court at about 9 am in a convoy accompanied by ICPC officials and operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS).

During the proceedings, supporters of the former governor gathered outside the courtroom, while security agencies maintained order and restricted movement within the vicinity.

Inside the courtroom, journalists, as usual, were not allowed, as proceedings are expected to focus on arguments presented by both the defence and prosecution regarding the bail request.

At the last sitting, the defence team had maintained that their client poses no flight risk and is willing to comply with all conditions set by the court.

Meanwhile, the prosecution has urged the court to carefully consider the gravity of the charges.

The 66-year-old former governor of Kaduna has been in ICPC custody since February 19 following his release by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

El-Rufai, a former minister of the FCT, was, however, released on March 27 based on compassionate grounds following his mother’s death.

Continue Reading

Featured

Timi Frank Petitions US, Demands Gbajabiamila’s Resignation over ‘Anti-Democratic’ Remarks

Published

on

By

Political activist, Comrade Timi Frank, has called on the United States government to investigate and sanction the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, over alleged actions capable of undermining Nigeria’s democracy.

Frank’s demand followed a viral video in which Gbajabiamila was quoted as telling Hon Leke Abejide, during his wife’s 50th birthday that: “Don’t come to APC. Stay in ADC and scatter them. We like what you’re doing… stay in ADC and win your election… bring Bala Gombe, and we’ll support him. Good luck in court.”

Describing the remarks as “reckless” and dangerous, the former Deputy National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC), said they point to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition parties and erode democratic institutions.

“Your statement, as Chief of Staff, raises serious concerns about the determination by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s regime to truncate democracy,” he said, adding that “inference can be made that there is an infringement on the independence of the judiciary.”

He warned that any suggestion that courts could be influenced “undermines public confidence in democratic institutions,” citing references to political actors, including Leke Abejide, as requiring clarification to avoid “dangerous interpretations.”

Frank argued that Gbajabiamila’s comments effectively confirm the Presidency’s involvement in crises rocking opposition parties such as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Social Democratic Party (SDP), New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), and the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

“When a Chief of Staff speaks, it reflects the body language of the President. This points to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition and consolidate power,” he said.

He further claimed that state influence, including the use of the judiciary, is being deployed against opposition parties. “The audacity of the statement suggests nothing will happen even if opposition parties are destabilised. That is dangerous,” he added.

Frank described Gbajabiamila as “an alter ego of the President” who had “displayed the arrogance of power,” insisting that public office holders must uphold restraint, respect for the rule of law and constitutional order.

He also urged U.S. authorities to probe Gbajabiamila’s activities and financial dealings.

“As an American citizen, he should be held accountable. We want to know if he is meeting his tax obligations in line with his earnings in Nigeria,” Frank said, describing him as “a bad ambassador of the United States.”

“We want to be sure that all earnings, including those from official and business engagements in Nigeria, are properly declared and taxed,” he added.

On accountability, Frank insisted resignation was the only honourable option.

“We call for your resignation with immediate effect. If such a statement were made in the United States, the official involved would have resigned forthwith,” he said.

He disclosed plans to petition the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, stressing that “those entrusted with leadership must reflect humility, constitutional awareness and respect for separation of powers.”

“Power is transient, but institutions must endure. Any comment that diminishes their independence must be corrected,” he added.

The call comes amid rising concerns over the stability of Nigeria’s multiparty system and allegations of increasing pressure on opposition parties.

Comrade Timi Frank is the ULMWP Ambassador (East Africa and Middle East) and Senior Advisor, Global Friendship City Association (GFCA), USA.

Continue Reading

Featured

Alleged Coup Plotters Get April 22 Date for Trial, Slammed with 13-Count Charge

Published

on

By

The Federal Government has filed a 13-count charge before the Federal High Court in Abuja against a retired Major General, a retired Naval Captain, a serving police inspector, and three others over an alleged coup plot and acts of terrorism.

The alleged coup plotters, are scheduled to be arraigned tomorrow (Wednesday), April 22, before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Those named in the charge are Major General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana (rtd), Captain (NN) Erasmus Ochegobia Victor (rtd), Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni, and Abdulkadir Sani.

Also listed as a defendant, but said to be at large, is former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

The charge, filed by the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and signed by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, accuses the defendants of offences ranging from treason and terrorism to failure to disclose security intelligence and money laundering linked to terrorism financing.

At the centre of the case is an allegation that the defendants conspired in 2025 to undermine the Nigerian state.

According to the charge, they “conspired with one another to levy war against the state to overawe the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” an offence punishable under Section 37(2) of the Criminal Code.

The prosecution further alleged that the defendants had prior knowledge of a planned treasonable act involving one Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Ma’aji and others but failed to alert authorities.

The charge stated that they, “knowing that and intended to commit treason, did not give the information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President or a Peace Officer.”

In another count, the defendants were accused of failing to take preventive steps, as they allegedly “did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence.”

Beyond treason, the Federal Government is prosecuting the defendants for terrorism-related offences under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The charge alleged that they “conspired with one another to commit an act of terrorism in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

Particularly, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim and Zekeri Umoru are accused of participating in meetings linked to terrorist activities.

Prosecutors claim they acted “in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilise the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

The charge also accused the defendants of providing support for terrorism, alleging that they “knowingly and indirectly rendered support” to facilitate acts of terror.

In addition, the prosecution alleged a deliberate suppression of intelligence, stating that the defendants “had information which would be of material assistance in preventing the commission of the act of terrorism but failed to disclose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable.”

The case further traced financial transactions allegedly linked to terrorism financing, with multiple defendants accused of handling proceeds of unlawful activities.
Bukar Kashim Goni is alleged to have “indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N50,000,000, which forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act, to wit: terrorism financing,” while Abdulkadir Sani allegedly retained N2 million from a similar source.

Zekeri Umoru, according to the charge, “without going through a financial institution accepted a cash payment of the sum of N10,000,000,” and also retained an additional N8.8 million suspected to be proceeds of terrorism financing.

Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim was also accused of taking possession of N1 million linked to the same alleged scheme.

All financial-related counts were brought under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The 13-count charge presents what prosecutors describe as a coordinated network involving security personnel, civilians, and a politically exposed individual, allegedly connected to activities threatening national security.

Continue Reading

Trending