Tribunal: Why Peter Obi, LP Lose 25% Votes Claim Against Tinubu

The Labour Party (LP) has lost one of its petition challenging the results of the February 25 presidential election on the grounds that the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) President Bola Ahmed Tinubu failed to secure 25% of total votes cast in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

The court in its ruling at the ongoing hearing of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) noted that FCT residents have no special privileges as the petitioners claimed.

In another petition filed by the LP, it alleged that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) reduced their scores and added them to APC votes.

The court ruled that the LP failed to supply particulars of what they actually scored before the said reductions, nor did they supply the polling units where it happened.

Peter Obi Wins As Tribunal Declares APC’s Petition Incompetent

The Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) in its judgement has declared the APC’s petition challenging Peter Obi’s membership of the Labour Party as incompetent.

VerseNews reports that Justice Abba says membership in a political party is an internal affair.

The Tribunal also touched on the issue of non-joinder of Atiku Abubakar who came second and wondered how Obi & LP’s petition could be effectively determined without joining the candidate who placed second in the polls

‘Labour Party’s Widespread Irregularities Claim Generic’ – Tribunal

While highlighting a claim by the respondents that Obi’s petition only alleged that there were widespread irregularities without giving the particulars and the polling units.

Justice Abba Mohammed holds that In a presidential election held in 176,866 polling units in 774 Local Government Areas, it would be improper not to specify where there were irregularities.

According to him, the petitioners only made generic allegations.

“Pleading must set out material facts and particulars. In the instant petition, there was no effort to prove specific allegations, particulars of complaints,” said the Tribunal.

The law is clear that where someone alleges irregularities in a particular polling unit, such person must prove the particular irregularities in that polling unit before that petition can succeed, the Tribunal added.

The court said the petitioners did not prove the particular polling unit where the election did not take place nor did they specify particulars of polling units where there are alleged complainants of irregularities.

“It was only in one instance that figures were given of alleged suppressed votes and we all know that elections are about figures,” it said.

“LP alleged that INEC reduced their scores and added it to APC votes but failed to supply particulars of what they actually scored before the said reductions, neither did they supply the polling units where it happened….”