Umar Sani, a former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party Presidential Campaign Council, expressed his views on the disqualification of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the president of Nigeria, in a statement on his official Twitter handle. Umar stated that if Tinubu is not disqualified by the court, it would signify a lack of justice in Nigeria.
According to Umar, he carefully examined the petition filed by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) against Tinubu, Shetima, the All Progressives Congress (APC), and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). He noted that the petition seemed straightforward but carried strong allegations against Tinubu, Shetima, APC, and INEC.
Umar highlighted that the case was not primarily about double nomination, as some had presumed. Instead, it focused on an invalid nomination. He explained that at the time Tinubu nominated his running mate, he himself was no longer a candidate due to the combined provisions of the Constitution and the Electoral Act. Umar referred to Section 142(1) and Section 33 of the Constitution and Electoral Act, respectively.
Umar further clarified that while there was an impression that the case revolved around double nomination, the APC and Tinubu, in collaboration with INEC, presented arguments to the Supreme Court to escape the issue of double nomination. However, in their attempt to avoid the double nomination, they unintentionally fell into the category of an “invalid nomination.”
The statement emphasized that the APM’s argument was that as of July 14, 2022, the APC had no valid candidate for the presidency because the vice presidential candidate withdrew 21 days before a replacement was made, instead of within the required 14 days. Umar stressed that this was the law, and no court could amend it for the sake of one individual. He considered it a clear case of power coming from God.
Umar concluded by expressing curiosity about how the judiciary would handle the case, as the law, facts, and circumstances seemed to be against Tinubu’s candidacy. He acknowledged that it would be interesting to see any position contrary to what the law clearly states but remained open to the outcome of the legal proceedings.
Bubutain (
)
