The Presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has argued before the Presidential Election Petition Court on Friday that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) lacks the legal authority to defend Ahmed Bola Tinubu against drug and dual citizenship accusations.
Atiku insisted that INEC’s defense of Tinubu’s qualifications for the last presidential election amounted to unwarranted interference.
Specifically, Atiku accused the electoral body of meddling in matters that did not concern it.
INEC’s counsel, Mr. Kemi Pinhero SAN, had on friday presented a motion on notice, asking the Court to strike out certain allegations made by Atiku against Tinubu in his petition.
The electoral body pleaded with the Court to dismiss 32 allegations made by Atiku against Tinubu, including the forfeiture of $460,000 in the United States of America (USA), possession of Guinea’s passport, and allegiance to foreign countries.
In his petition challenging the declaration of Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the joint winners of the February 25 Presidential election, Atiku raised these allegations.
INEC argued that the Court should disregard these allegations, which constituted 32 paragraphs in Atiku’s petition, on various grounds, including lack of jurisdiction.
However, Atiku’s lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche SAN, strongly opposed INEC’s request in a counter affidavit and called on the Court to dismiss the electoral body’s position.
Uche argued that it was not INEC’s responsibility to fight or argue any case on behalf of Tinubu, who is the second defendant in the petition.
Specifically, Atiku’s lead counsel insisted that INEC should remain neutral and only defend the conduct of the disputed election.
He contended that INEC had deviated from its role by involving itself as a busybody and meddlesome interloper in defending Tinubu, which contravened the provisions of the law.
The senior lawyer asserted that INEC’s request in defense of Tinubu was not only baseless and unusual but also constituted a gross abuse of the court process and lacked merit.
Uche argued that all of INEC’s efforts to substantiate allegations against Tinubu should be considered futile, vexatious, and irritating and should not be entertained.
“INEC should not be here to fight Tinubu’s battle. INEC should be neutral and, at best, defend only the election it conducted, which is the subject of Alhaji Abubakar Atiku’s petition,” he stated.
“This application by INEC in support of Tinubu lacks merit. It is grossly incompetent and should be outrightly rejected and dismissed.”
Therefore, the senior lawyer requested the Court to dismiss INEC’s motion on the grounds of gross abuse of the court process, lack of merit, and gross incompetence.
Meanwhile, the Chairman of the Court, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani, has scheduled the ruling for the date of judgment in the substantive petition.