PRESIDENTIAL candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in 2019 general election has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the September 11 ruling of the Presidential Tribunal in favor of Muhammadu Buhari.
PDP and Atiku have filed an appeal on 66 grounds stating that the Presidential Election Petition Court constituted of Mohammed Garba, Abdu Aboki, Joseph Shagbaor,Ikyegh, Peter Olabisi, Samuel Oseji “err in law”.
The tribunal upheld Muhammadu Buhari’s victory in the February 23 Presidential Election discarding Atiku’s petition for inability to prove satisfactorily all the allegations brought before it.
PDP and Atiku filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court stating that they are dissatisfied with the judgement of the Court of Appeal seated as Presidential Election Petition Court.
“In furtherance of our desire to reclaim the popular mandate of Nigerians freely given to our Presidential Candidate, Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, the Party and its candidates have filed a 66 Grounds of appeal at the Supreme Court” as contained in a statement by PDP.
Some of the ground of appeal read, Ground 1: ERROR IN LAW
The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they relied on “overall interest of justice” to hold that the 2nd Respondent’s Exhibits R1 to R26, P85 and P86 were properly admitted in evidence.
Ground 2 of the Appeal Read: ERROR IN LAW
The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law when they held thus:
“My firm view is that Section 76 of the Electoral Act is clearly inapplicable to the issues under consideration. The form referred to are the form to be used in the conduct of the election as FORM CF001 had been taken care of in Section 31 of the Electoral Act and the said FORM CF001 is tied to the steps laid down in the said Section 31 of the Electoral Act.
More importantly, the law is firmly settled that a candidate is not required by the Constitution or the Electoral Act to attach his certificates to FORM CF001 before the candidate can be considered or adjudged to have the requisite educational qualifications to contest an election.
The appeal continued with other 64 grounds on which the Muhammed Garba-led tribunal had “err in law”.