Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has opposed the application for the live broadcast of proceedings at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

The electoral body on Thursday opposed the application filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar, arguing that doing so will “only defeat the solemn atmosphere of the court.”

Abubakar Mahmoud, counsel to INEC, argued that since the court was already opened to the public, there was no need to stream proceedings. He said they were under pressure and not ready to face more by having cameras on their faces.

“We urge your lordship to refuse this application,” Mr Mahmud prayed. “It is unnecessary and uncalled for. It will defeat the essence of administration of justice.

In all the jurisdictions that I’m aware of, live- streaming is not the same as televising it. In other countries, It is controlled by the court.

Bringing cameras into the courtroom will defeat the solemn atmosphere of the courtroom. The courtroom is not for theatrics. It is for serious business.

We don’t want to be put under additional pressure of cameras beaming in our faces,” INEC said.

APC, Tinubu align

Aligning with INEC’s position, Lateef Fagbemi, counsel to the All Progressives Congress (APC), said live streaming proceedings was akin to the Big Brother Naija reality show.

President-Elect Bola Tinubu represented by Wole Olanipekun, argued the court to dismiss the application because “the court is not a stadium or a crusade ground. It is not a theatre or circus.”

Mr Atiku and the PDP while fielding the application said the move will enhance public confidence.

“There is no single legislative or statutory position against it,” argued their lawyer, Chris Uche.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has stated the reason for denying Labour Party (LP) and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, access to some electoral documents they sought to prosecute their matter at the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC.

Levy Uzoukwu, lead counsel to the former Anambra governor and the opposition party had told the five-member panel of the PEPC on Wednesday that the electoral body denied them access to some electoral materials which will aid them in court.

Mr Uzokwu said INEC, which they wrote to on several occasions alongside court orders made on the 3rd and 5th days of March, “stubbornly refused to produce 70 percent of the electoral documents that were requested” in Rivers and Sokoto states.

He said the commission was requesting the sum of N1.5 million to provide access to that of Sokoto State alone.

“In the case of Rivers State, the INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) boldly told us they do not have any form EC8 to give us.”

He drew the attention of the court to two previous rulings directing INEC to grant access to LP for the inspection of electoral documents like Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS) machines that were deployed for the conduct of the poll.

In one of such rulings, the Court had on March 3 and 8 directed the electoral body to make available certified true copies of result sheets and other data obtained from the BVAS machines to tender same to aid the petitioner’s case.

Uzoukwu equally referred to five separate letters written to INEC chairman, Yakubu Mahmood, requesting that access be granted to inspect and obtain relevant electoral documents to strengthen the petitioner’s suit at the court.

However, counsel to INEC, Abubakar Mahmoud, who denied the allegations, said his client was ready to cooperate with all parties in the petitions and the court.

He told the court that Obi’s legal team declined to attend a meeting that was called to streamline issues around documents to be tendered before the court.

“We agreed to meet on Monday and Tuesday (15 and 16 May). But on Monday, 15 May, I received a call that the Labour Party legal team had not turned up at the venue for the inspection of the documents,” Mahmoud said.

He explained that LP was given some electoral documents in Rivers, but insisted on collecting all the documents that were required.

“The commission has not refused to produce any document,” Mahmoud said.

Obi’s counsel, Uzougwu, however responded that his team did not walk out of any meeting.

APC lead counsel, Lateef Fagbemi, agreed with INEC’s position regarding access to electoral documents.

“All public documents coming from INEC and duly certified will not be objected to but other documents may be objected to with reasons given and arguments presented at the end of the day before judgement. We are ready and willing to cooperate with the court,” he assured.

Lead counsel to Tinubu, Wole Olanipekun, said he had no issues accessing documents from the electoral umpire.

“We will reserve our objection to documents until the end of the trial,” Olanipekun said.

After listening to all parties, the court adjourned proceedings until May 19.

The former Minister of finance and current Director-General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has said a lot of trust was broken following the conduct of the 2023 general elections.

Okonjo-Iweala made this known on Monday at an induction ceremony organised for elected governors in Abuja, the nation’s capital.

Ngozi said no government can achieve growth and progress without first of all building trust, adding that there cannot be nation-building without the citizens trusting their political leaders.

She said: “If taking the wider global context into account is one prerequisite for successful nation-building, another prerequisite is trust and a sense of common purpose.

“I remain convinced that a better future is within our collective grasp. But to move ahead and seize it, we will need political and business leaders at the state and national levels to form a compact in pursuit of pro-growth and pro-development policies.

“We ought to be seeking to double our growth rate and sustain that higher growth until we attain upper middle-income status. We can also aim to double Nigeria’s share of world trade from 0.33% to 0.66% within a decade. To build such a compact, we need trust.

“Nation-building is impossible in the absence of trust — perhaps especially so in Nigeria. Even before independence, the generation of leaders that led us to freedom identified how important trust would be to our nation’s success.

“Honourable governors, let us be candid: trust in Nigeria has always been fragile but following the election, a lot of trust has been broken.

“Nigeria is a country with no social contract, meaning that Nigerian political leaders have never been able to agree with each other to stick to a common set of principles, values, and policies that consistently deliver for their citizens regardless of ethnic group or political persuasion.”

The former Minister of Finance said the governors-elect need to rebuild trust through their policies and programmes to regain the support of Nigerians.

She added: “Excellencies, you have a lot of healing to do — within your states, and between them. Through your words, deeds, and policies, you need to demonstrate to Nigerians that they are equally loved. That they can settle and do business in any part of the country without fear. I love Nigeria deeply and I want to feel welcome in any part of this country.

“Just as different states need to rebuild perceptions among people across Nigeria, we collectively need to rebuild the Nigerian brand in the wider regional and international economy.

“Narratives about countries matter for capital allocation decisions — especially for emerging markets and developing economies. When we have presented a positive story in the past, backed by a credible reform trajectory, foreign investment has followed.

“When we have shown that we are cognizant that we account for around 70% of the West African sub-region’s GDP and 23% of sub-Saharan Africa’s GDP, and we have run our country and economy responsibly to benefit not just us, but the region and sub-region, we have garnered respect.

“We must continue to recognize that Nigeria has an outsize role to play at home and abroad and we must manage our country better not just for ourselves but also for the rest of Africa.

National Women Leader of the Labour Party, Mrs. Dudu Maluga stood up to introduce herself as LP representative but whilst she was speaking, Apapa stood up and attempted to introduce himself as representing LP but she stood her ground. The court then said as there’s a conflict of who is representing LP at court, they won’t record any appearance for LP representative in court (there’s no consequence for that because the counsels will represent them)

Labour Party Lead counsel Barrister Levi says “My Lord we are yet to receive about 70% of the documents INEC are supposed to give us to aid our case”

He says in Rivers for example, the Resident Electoral Commissioner told LP boldly that they don’t have any Form EC8As to give and refused to put that in writing even on request.

Olanipekun (Tinubu’s counsel) with AD Mahmud SAN (INEC’s counsel) stated that documents have been filed and adopted. But Dr Livie is saying those documents are not complete and they can’t move a motion without those documents from INEC. Respondent’s are saying they too don’t have said documents so petitioners should proceed with what they have.

Dr LIvy is arguing they have written about 5 letters requesting for some documents from INEC, according to order of the court yet INEC haven’t responded and those documents are crucial for this case.

Dr. Livy is saying he will file another application to the court for INEC to produce the necessary documents in court.

AD Mahmud SAN agreed they will set up a team to procure these documents which won’t be objected to by both parties.

Dr. Ivy SAN will subpoena INEC to produce those documents by force.

AD Mahmud SAN is still addressing the court on his commitment to ensuring that INEC provides all requested documents.

Olanipekun (Tinubu’s counsel) is arguing that the petitioner’s team (LP & Obi) walked out of a meeting they scheduled yesterday. They asked LP’s team to pay 1.5 million Naira for certification of documents from INEC.

Basically the respondents (INEC, Tinubu, Shettima & APC) are working together. Olanipekun just mentioned it in his own address that the petitioner’s should pay for certification of documents from INEC so the petition can proceed.

Dr Livy just responded that the petitioner’s team, Ikechukwu Ezechukwu and Prof. Paul Ananabah SAN never walked out of the said meeting.

Dr. Livy said they’re ready to pay the 1.5 million Naira fee if the other team are ready to provide the needed documents.

11:24 UPDATE

Dr. Ivy just told the court to make a pronouncement asking INEC to provide the documents as they’re ready to pay ‘any’ amount they ask for.

Dr. Ivy reiterated that since the institution of the petition, they have filed on time every document required of them and any delay we’re experiencing at the moment is as a result of the actions of the respondents.

11:36 UPDATE

The court adjourned the case till Friday but Olanipekun (Tinubu’s counsel) objected saying they need time to reply the petitioners (LP & Obi) or respond in person.

He’s calling for the lead counsels to “put heads together.”

UPDATE

The court adjourned the case till Friday but Olanipekun (Tinubu’s counsel) objected saying they need time to reply the petitioners (LP & Obi) or respond in person.

He’s calling for the lead counsels to “put heads together.”

The Presidential Election Petition court on Wednesday refused to recognise any representative of the Labour Party except the 1st petitioner, Peter Obi who was in court.

The court presided over by Justice Haruna Tsammani reached the decision having been possibly intimated that there was a disagreement between two factions of the party before the court resumed proceedings.

When the matter was called, Obi stood up to announce his appearance followed by Dudu Manuga, the National Women’s Leader of the Party who sat close to Obi.

Meanwhile, Before the court could record Manuga on the list, Lamidi Apapa quickly stood up to announce his appearance as the representative of the Labour Party.

However, Justice Haruna interjected and said, ” It appears there was a little disagreement… We are not recognizing any representative from the party.”

Earlier on, factions of the Labour Party could be sighted at the PEPC Court, engaging in a war of words over which faction is the authentic one.

The Lamidi Apapa-led faction of the LP was challenging why members of the party loyal to Julius Abure were in the court.

They asserted that the ruling of a High Court of the FCT, suspending the Abure-led faction, remains.

The court rose on the last adjourned date for the continuation of the pre-hearing of Peter Obi’s petition.

The drama which could have interfered with today’s proceedings appears to have been arrested with this intervention.

(Punch)

The President-elect, Bola Tinubu, and the Vice President-elect, Kashim Shettima, have urged the Presidential Election Petition Court to dismiss the application by Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party for a live broadcast of proceedings.

They argued that the relief sought by the applicants are not such that the court could grant it.

“With much respect to the petitioners, the motion is an abuse of the processes of this honourable court,” the respondents stated.

Besides describing the application as frivolous, they said the court is not a soapbox, stadium or theatre where the public should be entertained.

Through their team of lawyers, led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, they wondered why a petitioner would file an application to distract the court and waste its precious time.

They stated, in the counter affidavit, that the application relates to policy formulation of the court, which is outside the PEPC’s jurisdiction as constituted.

“The application also touches on the powers and jurisdiction invested in the President of the Court of Appeal by the Constitution, over which this honourable court as presently constituted cannot entertain.

The application touches on the administrative functions, which are exclusively reserved for the President of the Court of Appeal.

“The application is aimed at dissipating the precious judicial time of this honourable court.

“The said application does not have any bearing with the petition filed by the petitioners before this honourable court.

“It is in the interest of justice for this honourable court to dismiss the said application filed by the petitioners,” they said.

In an attached written address, the respondents faulted the applicants’ reference to the fact that virtual proceedings were allowed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

They argued that Atiku and his party failed to draw the court’s attention to the fact that practice directions were made by the respective courts for the exercise.

“Another angle to this very curious application is the invitation it extends to the court to make an order that it cannot supervise.

The position of the law remains, and we do submit that the court, like nature, does not make an order in vain, or an order which is incapable of enforcement,” the respondents stated.

More so, they stated that “At the very best, this application is academic, very otiose, very unnecessary, very time-wasting, most unusual and most unexpected, particularly, from a set of petitioners, who should be praying for the expeditious trial of their petition.

“Petitioners have brought their application under Section 36(3) of the Constitution which provides that the proceedings of a court/tribunal shall be held in public.

“The word ‘public’ as applied under Section 36(3) of the Constitution has been defined in a plethora of judicial authorities to mean a place where members of the public have unhindered access, and the court itself, sitting behind open doors, not in the camera.

“Even in situations where a class action is presented, the particular people constituting the class being represented by the plaintiffs or petitioners are always defined in the originating process.

“Here, in this application, the public at whose behest this application has been presented is not defined, not known, not discernable.

“Beyond all these, it is our submission that the court of law must and should always remain what it is, what it should be and what it is expected to be: a serene, disciplined, hallowed, tranquil, honourable and decorous institution and place.

It is not a rostrum or a soapbox. It is not also a stadium or theatre. It is not an arena for ‘public’ entertainment.

“With much respect to the petitioners, the motion is an abuse of the processes of this honourable court.”

(Punch)

A United States convoy was attacked in Nigeria on Tuesday, May 16 k!|ling four people, including two personnel from the US consulate and two police officers, with three others kidnapped, according to the Nigerian security services and US state department officials.

The attack took place in Anambra state, with Anambra Police Command saying the attackers “m¥rdered two police operatives and two staff of the US consulate and set their bodies and their vehicles ablaze.”

The personnel who were killed were not US citizens, according to the White House and the local police. “No US citizens were involved and therefore there were no US citizens hurt,” said John Kirby of the US National Security Council. “We are aware of some casualties, perhaps even some k!lled.”

When the assailants saw security forces “they made away with two police operatives and a driver of the second vehicle in the convoy,” Ikenga Tochukwu, deputy superintendent of police, said. “No US citizen was in the convoy,” he added.

Police said that joint security forces “have embarked on a rescue and recovery operation in the area.”

A State Department spokesperson said Tuesday that “Mission Nigeria personnel are working with Nigerian security services to investigate.”

The State Department added: “The security of our personnel is always paramount, and we take extensive precautions when organizing trips to the field,” they continued