Abubakar Atiku, the Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), faced a significant setback in his legal quest to challenge Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s status as Nigeria’s elected President.

This setback occurred when the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal dismissed numerous paragraphs from Atiku’s petition, which he had relied upon in his efforts to have Tinubu removed from office.

Furthermore, the Tribunal rejected various exhibits and witness statements that Atiku had presented to substantiate his claims of irregularities and malpractices during the presidential election held on February 25. In essence, the Tribunal did not consider these materials as credible evidence.

During the delivery of the ruling on objections raised by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, on behalf of Tinubu, Justice Moses Ugoh emphasized that several portions of Atiku’s petition lacked a solid legal foundation to stand on and were therefore not deemed competent by the Tribunal.

Much like what happened to Peter Obi of the Labour Party, the court pointed out that Atiku’s petition lacked essential facts needed to support his claims effectively. This ruling represents a significant setback for Atiku in his legal battle to challenge the election results and Tinubu’s presidency. 

Among other crucial omissions, Atiku failed to specify the locations where ballot boxes were stolen, the methods by which the BVAS machines were manipulated, and the names of polling booths where he alleged malpractices occurred.

The petitioner, who asserted that he received the majority of lawful votes, did not provide a clear statement regarding the total number of lawful votes he claimed to have garnered. The Court noted that while Atiku argued that Tinubu did not secure the majority of lawful votes, he did not disclose the exact number of lawful votes he believed he obtained in his petition to the Tribunal.

Furthermore, the Tribunal pointed out that the former Vice President made serious allegations against Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, and the Chairman of Olamaboro Local Government in Kogi, Friday Adejoh, without including them as respondents in the petition.

Justice Ugoh emphasized that the failure to include the Governor, who was accused of electoral fraud, was fatal to the petition because it denied the Governor the opportunity to defend himself, as mandated by the law. 

The Tribunal delivered a ruling, dismissing the petitioner’s allegations of widespread overvoting across Nigeria. It deemed these claims in violation of the law since they lacked specific details regarding the locations where the alleged overvoting incidents occurred.

Additionally, Atiku’s petition faced criticism for introducing numerous facts and allegations in an unlawful manner, catching the respondents off guard. This tactic was regarded as unfair and overly strategic.

Among the problematic new facts introduced by Atiku were allegations of criminal conviction, certificate forgery, and dual citizenship of Guinea, which were presented against Tinubu outside the standard procedure for filing a petition.

Justice Stephen Jonah Adah, in another ruling on objections against the petition, removed several documents submitted by Atiku on the grounds that they were created while the petition was ongoing. Furthermore, the evidence presented by several key witnesses for Atiku was expunged from the Court record as it did not adhere to legal procedures.

The Tribunal concluded that the irregular approach taken by the PDP’s presidential candidate in constructing the petition led to the removal of several paragraphs from the petition for lacking merit.