We Were Taught In Law School That Judges Don't Grant Prayers That You Didn't Ask For–Chris Nwaokobia

Professor Chris Nwokobia, a spokesperson for the Obi/Datti Campaign Council, has expressed concerns about the decision made by the judges in the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT). He believes that the judges made a questionable decision by disregarding the evidence provided by a witness from the Labour Party on the basis of her party affiliation while accepting evidence from a prominent member of the APC who is also the Senate Majority Leader.

Nwokobia revealed the principle in law that judges should not descend to the arena of politics and should only grant prayers that are explicitly requested. He noted that the judges initially refused to admit the evidence from the Labour Party witness because of her party membership but then reversed their position and accepted evidence from a sitting Senator, who is a member of the APC.

He raised concerns about the consistency and fairness of the tribunal’s decision-making process, particularly regarding the admission of evidence from witnesses associated with different political parties. Such concerns can lead to debates about the impartiality and transparency of the judicial process in electoral disputes.

Hear him: ”In law, we were taught as young people in law school that Judges do not descend to the Arena, that they do not grant prayers that you do not ask for. Let me state unequivocally that when the judges came down to the arena, they stated unequivocally that a certain witness from the Labour Party was a party member.

PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO 2:37

He further said: “The Amazon representative stated that they could not admit her evidence because she is a member of the Labour Party, but then reversed her position and admitted evidence from a sitting Senator. Bamidele Opeyemi, my brother and buddy is currently the Senate majority leader. That is, on the one hand, admitting that, if you like, it was Esau’s voice and Jacob’s actions.”

HealthTourist (
)