Politics

INEC server not obtainable for PDP supervision

INEC server not obtainable for PDP supervision
Share
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) heard yesterday that there was no server for the Peoples Democratic {Party} (PDP) and its candidate within the February 23 presidential election to examine.

Responding to the request of the PDP and Atiku Abubakar to compel the electoral umpire to permit them entry to the server utilized in transmitting the outcomes of the presidential ballot, INEC informed the tribunal that no server was used for the election.

President Muhammadu Buhari, his {party} – the All Progressives Congress (APC) – and INEC urged the PEPT to reject Atiku’s and PDP’s request to be allowed entry to INEC’s server and card reader machines.

Buhari argued that granting the request would quantity to the tribunal overruling itself, having earlier, in a ruling delivered on March 6, rejected the same request made by Atiku and PDP.

APC contended that the request amounted to asking the court docket to make an order in useless, since INEC claimed that the data being sought by Atiku and his {party} doesn’t exist.

INEC urged the tribunal to reject the request as contained in an software by Atiku and PDP, as a result of “we should not have what they mentioned they need”.

Buhari, APC and INEC made their positions recognized on the resumed sitting of the PEPT yesterday in Abuja.

Atiku filed a petition earlier than the tribunal, in search of, amongst others, the nullification of the election gained by Buhari, APC’s candidate.

The applying was one of many 9 heard at yesterday’s pre-hearing session of the PEPT.

Shifting the applying, the lawyer to Atiku and PDP, Chris Uche (SAN), prayed the court docket to grant the applying filed on Could 8.

Uche mentioned the applying sought 4 reliefs, principal amongst which was “for entry or court docket’s supervised entry to the INEC’s server and the sensible card readers used for the conduct of the 2019 presidential election”.

INEC’s lawyer, Yunus Usman (SAN), prayed the tribunal to dismiss the applying. He drew its consideration to the March 6, 2019 ruling by which the tribunal rejected the same request by the petitioners.

Usman mentioned: “We additionally hooked up an enrolled order made on March 6, 2019 by this court docket. The order refused all of the prayers of the petitioners as contained on this software.

“They are saying we must always deliver one thing that we don’t have and we have now mentioned what they need doesn’t exist.”

Buhari’s lawyer, Wole Olanipekun (SAN) and APC’s counsel, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), argued in the same vein and urged the tribunal to dismiss the applying.

Olanipekun exhibited a duplicate of the movement ex-parte filed on March four by the petitioners by which they prayed for related reliefs and a duplicate of the enrolled order of the court docket made on March 6, extracted from the tribunal’s ruling on the ex-parte movement.

“We urge this court docket to dismiss this software and to not overrule your self as being sought on this software,” Olanipekun mentioned.

Fagbemi mentioned: “In praying the court docket to dismiss the applying, we equally urge the court docket to be cautious of constructing an order that can’t be enforced.

“INEC has mentioned they don’t have these supplies. Extra so, no proof is provided by the candidates that the supplies exist.

“Past the newspapers report provided, they didn’t present any concrete proof to show the existence of the supplies they search to be granted entry to.”

After listening to the attorneys, the tribunal’s chairman, Justice Mohammed Garba mentioned the date for ruling could be communicated to them.

Earlier, one other lawyer within the authorized group of Atiku and PDP, Livy Uzoukwu (SAN), had moved an software by which he prayed the court docket to strike out the third respondent’s reply to the petitioners’ petition, a request Fagbemi (as lawyer to the APC) objected to and urged the tribunal to dismiss.

The tribunal adjourned additional pre-hearing session in respect of the petition by Atiku and the PDP until June 24.

Earlier than listening to the 2 functions by the petitioners, the tribunal heard seven functions filed in relation to the petition by the Hope Democratic {Party} (HDP) and its presidential candidate, Ambrose Owuru, difficult the end result of the final presidential election.

One of many functions filed by the petitioners, via their lawyer, Mr. Oliver Eya, sought an modification of their petition.

Olanipekun and Fagbemi didn’t oppose the applying, however Usman (representing INEC) urged the court docket to reject it.

The tribunal additionally heard the three functions filed by INEC, one by Buhari and two by APC.

The functions by the three respondents sought the dismissal of both the petition or the petitioners’ reply to a respondent’s reply, on numerous grounds.

The tribunal additionally reserved rulings on all of the functions and promised to tell attorneys when the ruling could be learn.

It adjourned additional pre-hearing session on the petition until June 20.

FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedInWhatsAppEmail

Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
Notify of