According to Vanguard, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu said that all 27 witnesses summoned by Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in the trial against him before the Presidential Petitions Tribunal failed to present “useful” evidence.
Recall that Atiku is contesting the results of the February 25 presidential election and is praying that the court will annul Tinubu’s victory, saying he is “unqualified” to run in the election.
Atiku and the PDP allege, among other things, that the President has been charged with drug trafficking in the United States, that his academic credentials presented to the electoral body are forged, and that he is a Guinean citizen.
The petitioners also accused the Independent National Electoral Commission of rigging the poll in favor of Tinubu.
The plaintiffs closed their case on June 23 after calling 27 witnesses.
However, in the last written speech on July 14, Tinubu, through his attorney Wole Olanipekun, described the testimonies presented by all 27 witnesses as a plethora of hearsay, concessions against interest, and irrelevance on the part of the petitioners.
Without fear of contradiction, the plaintiffs do not have a single witness whose evidence could be considered useful or manageable in their case.
According to Olanipekun, the only witness he called was competent and able to discredit the plaintiffs’ case. Information Nigeria understands Senate Majority Leader Opeyemi Bamidele was the only witness summoned by the President.
This witness has unquestionably demonstrated competence to testify about the matters presented to the court, including matters relating to the US proceedings.
As a practicing attorney and legal counsel himself in the United States, As a legislature involved in the passage of the 2022 election bill, he also set out the legislature’s position and intent, particularly as to the appropriate mode of transmission and the Transmission and compilation of results.
Olanipekun explained. Based on the arguments and submissions contained in the closing speech, he asked the court to dismiss this petition as unfounded, void of substance, and credible.
clearly shown and demonstrated that the petition itself is not only frivolous but also constitutes a gross abuse of the judicial process to substantiate the abusive nature of the petition itself, he added.
Source; Vanguard
Johnwilbow (
)
