CITIZENS COMPASS – THE Presidential Candidate of All Progressives Party (APC) Bola Ahmed Tinubu, has responded to the petition filed by the Labour Party’s Presidential Candidate, Peter Obi at the Election Tribunal Court.
Tinubu responded through his team of lawyers led by His team of lawyers led by Wole Olanikpekun.
He argued that the former Anambra State government was not a lawful member of the LP as of the time he contested on the party’s platform, and lacks the locus standi to challenge the outcome of the exercise.
He queried the competence of Obi’s petition and prayed the court to dismiss it.
The lawyers said that as at May 24, 2022, six days before the primary election of the Labour Party purportedly held to produce/elect Obi as the presidential candidate of the party for the presidential election held on February 25, 2023, Obi was still a card-carrying member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and he did not resign his membership of the said party until 24th May 2022.
They also said that as of 30 days before Labour Party’s presidential primary, Obi was still a presidential aspirant in the PDP.
Other arguments presented by the lawyers were that the grounds on which the petition is predicated are incompetent, thereby denying the court the needed jurisdiction.
They srguec that the reliefs being sought by the petitioners are not only incompetent but also ungrantable.
They also argued that the claim by Obi and his party that Tinubu was not qualified to contest the election was outside the issue the court could deal with because it falls within the precinct of pre-election issues.
They said that Tinubu was never convicted as claimed by Peter Obi.
He further argued that he is not currently under sentence of death imposed by any competent court of law or tribunal in Nigeria or sentence of imprisonment or fine for any offence involving dishonesty or fraud imposed by any competent court of law or tribunal in Nigeria.
The lawywes pointed out that Obi did not disclose any fact showing that within a -period of fewer than 10 years before the date of the election to the office of President, Tinubu had been sentenced for an offence involving dishonesty or had been found guilty of the contravention of the code of conduct.
Tinubu faulted the claim by the petitioners that Tinubu’s running mate Kashim Shettima was not qualified to stand for election in view of his alleged double nomination.
They equally faulted the petitioners’ questioning of the manner Tinubu appointed his running mate.
