The All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential and vice presidential candidates, Alhaji Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Senator Kashim Ibrahim Shettima, who are the second and third Respondents in the petition filed by Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Gregory Obi, have stated reasons why they objected to the Certified True Copies (CTC) of the documents tendered at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).
The petitions followed the election to the office of the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria held on 25th February, 2023, with petition no: CA/PEPC/03/2023, wherein the Petitioners tendered a host of documents against which the Respondents indicated their objections.
It could be recalled that the respondents, including even the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had objected to the documents which were reportedly issued by the electoral commission.
In their closing arguments in the Court of Appeal at Abuja where the petition was holden, Tinubu/Shettima gave several reasons why they rejected the said documents, saying that INEC downloaded and certified irrelevant documents for the Petitioners.
In their written address to the admissibility of documents which essentially captures the various objections of the 2nd & 3rd Respondents in relation to the documents tendered by the Petitioners but admitted and marked by the tribunal, subject to objection, they said amongst other things:
“The above documents are ward collation results sheets for Ebonyi State ECBBs, Local Government Collation Result sheets for Ekiti and Delta States respectively.
“We note from the tenor of the Petition that the Petitioners have not agitated any complaint in relation to the aforementioned States. Therefore, it is a complete remiss for the Petitioners to belabour this tribunal with tons of election materials therefrom.
“Accordingly, the 2nd and 3rd Respondents submit that the documents are not relevant to the inquiry being undertaken by this court.
“Relevancy is the bedrock of admissibility such that any document that does not enjoy or wear the toga of relevance will automatically enjoy no reception in evidence.”
Respecting the IREV Report from INEC for Adamawa State filed on 08.06.2023, the Respondents objected to documents tendered by Peter Obi/Labour Party as per their sixth schedule of documents, saying:
“The above documents are IREV Report from INEC for Adamawa State downloaded and certified by the 1st Respondent.
“We object to the admissibility of the said documents on the ground that no certificate of authentication in compliance with section 84 (2) of the Evidence Act was produced at the point of tendering the said documents.
“We submit that conditions spelt out therein are mandatory and cannot be waived.”
As per the documents filed on 13.06.2023 tendered by the petitioners for Niger, Osun, Edo and Sokoto States, Tinubu/Shettima stated:
“The documents relate to Form EC400 (Summary of Registered Voters of Polling Units: Election not Held/cancelled) for Niger, Osun, Edo and Sokoto States, and EC8As for Ekiti and Ogun States.
“We submit that having failed to ventilate any complaint on the Presidential election held in the aforementioned States, the documents tendered by the Petitioners serve no useful purpose and are thus irrelevant to the case of the Petitioner.
“We accordingly adopt our earlier arguments and urge this Honourable Court to reject the documents.”
Respecting the IREV report for Bayelsa and Gombe States tendered by the petitioners as per their ninth Schedule of documents filed on 09.06.2023, the Respondents, objecting, said:
‘The above documents are IREV report for Bayelsa and Gombe States downloaded and certified by the Ist Respondent. Again, the Petitioners did not make any complaint with respect to the said States.
“We accordingly adopt our arguments on the relevance of the said documents and urge this Honourable Court to expunge the said exhibits from its record.”
Reacting to the 10th and 11th schedule of documents for Cross River and Gombe States filed on 20.06.2023 simultaneously, Tinubu/Shettima noted:
“These are supplementary IREV reports for Cross River and Gombe States downloaded and certified by the Respondent. As earlier noted, the Petitioners did not ventilate any complaints with regards to the said States.
“In the circumstance we adopt our earlier arguments and urge this honourable Court to find and hold that the said documents are not relevant to the case of the Petitioners.”
On the ECSAs for Bayelsa, Oyo, Edo, Ebonyi, Nasarawa, Delta, Ondo, Sokoto and Kogi States tendered by the petitioners as per their 12th schedule of documents filed on same day, Tinubu/Shettima objected:
“These are ECSAs for Bayelsa, Oyo, Edo, Ebonyi, Nasarawa, Delta, Ondo, Sokoto and Kogi States. The Petitioners did not make any complaint with respect to the said States.
“We accordingly adopt our arguments on the relevance of the said documents and urge this Honourable Court to expunge the said exhibits from its record.”
Post a Comment