By Lekan Adejuwon
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party have rejected the verdict of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) affirming President Bola Ahmed Tinubu victory at the February 25 poll.
The PDP decision was conveyed in a statement issued late in the night and signed by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Debo Ologunagba.
LP’s rejection was announced in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Obiora Ifoh.
But LP’s factional National Chairman Lamidi Apapa disagreed with party’s position. He hailed the verdict and said that the party’s candidate, Mr. Peter Obi had been on wild goose chase.
The statement PDP statement reads: “Few moments ago, the PEPC delivered judgment in the petition filed by our party, the PDP and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the All Progressives Congress (APC) and Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu over the declaration of the APC and Senator Tinubu as winner of the February 25, 2023 presidential election by INEC.
“As a party, we have had an initial review of the judgment as delivered by the PEPC and we unequivocally reject the judgement in its entirety.
“The judgment is against reason, against the facts and evidence presented in court; against the relevant electoral laws, guidelines and regulations as well as the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
“Indeed, the judgment is generous in technicalities and very short in delivering substantial justice in the matter. The PDP, as a law-abiding political party, will with our lawyers, have a comprehensive review of the judgment and decide on the next line of action within the ambit of the law.”
In its statement, the LP spokesman said that “justice was not served and it did not reflect the law and the desire of the people.”
He said that the party’s next line of action would be made known after consulting with its lawyers and studying the certified true copy of the judgement.
But, the Lamidi Apapa-led faction hailed the judgment by the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led panel.
Iloh said: “The LP watched with dismay and trepidation the dismissal petitions by the five-man panel of the Presidential Election Petition Court, led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, today and we reject the outcome of the judgment in its entirety because justice was not served and it did not reflect the law and the desire of the people.
“Nigerians were witnesses to the electoral robbery that took place on February 25, 2023, which was globally condemned but the Tribunal in its wisdom refused to accept the obvious.
“What is at stake is democracy and we will not relent until the will of the people prevail. We salute the doggedness of our team of lawyers who fearlessly exposed the wrath in our system. We can only weep for democracy in Nigeria, but we refuse to give up on Nigeria.
“Details of the party’s position will be presented after consultation with our lawyers after the Certified True Copy of the Judgement has been received
Apapa hails judgment
The Apapa-led faction said: “As a law abiding party, we accept the verdict, and we are going back to the drawing board to know where we have gone wrong.”
The faction said it warned Obi not to pursue any case, stressing that the presidential candidate was “chasing a wild goose.”
In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Abayomi Arabambi, the faction said: “It is a shame that the legal team of Mr Peter Obi failed to advise him properly before going to the tribunal.
“Peter Obi has just gone on a wild goose chase. Imagine the candidate failed to fund the party in order to engage the number of required polling agents. Also, the filing of the witnesses outside the stipulated time has shown that the legal team is a failure.
“Some of us have been saying that Peter Obi decided to go to the tribunal to justify all the money he collected during the campaign.
“It’s unfortunate that Obi failed to convince the tribunal about those polling units where he was rigged out. The tribunal also said that he ‘made generic allegations of irregularities against the respondent without specifying the polling units.
“The petitioners alleged irregularities and will use spreadsheets, inspection reports, and forensic analysis as evidence in the trial. The documents promised by the petitioners were not attached to the petition and served on the respondents.”
SOURCE: THE NATION
