Presidential Poll: Atiku, PDP withdraw fresh application against INEC
The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and its candidate, Atiku Abubakar, on Wednesday, withdrew a fresh application they filed to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to allow their agents to participate in the process of sorting out ballot papers that were used for the presidential election that held on February 25.
Both PDP and Atiku, who are separately challenging the outcome of the election that was declared in favour of the candidate of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, Bola Tinubu, told the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, sitting at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, that they were no longer interested in the application.
When the motion ex-parte, marked: CA/PEC/10M/2023, was called up for hearing on Wednesday, Atiku, through his team of lawyers led by Mr. Joe Kyari Gadzama, SAN, told the court that he filed a notice of discontinuance.
The decision of Atiku who came second in the presidential election, to withdraw the application, was a fallout of a meeting his legal team held with the leadership of the electoral body on Tuesday.
“We filed the application owing to challenges and administrative bottlenecks we encountered at the INEC office when we went for access to the election materials as ordered by the court.
“However, before the application dated March 13 could be slated for hearing, INEC, on its own, called our legal team for a meeting.
“It was at that meeting which held yesterday (Tuesday) that all the grey areas were sorted out, with INEC, pledging to allow our agents to observe the process of sorting out some of the electoral materials we requested for, especially the ballot papers.
“Since that was primarily our prayer in the fresh application we filed, we felt that it would not be necessary to proceed with the hearing. So, to save judicial time, we filed a notice of discontinuance which was accordingly granted”, a member of Atiku’s legal team, who did not want his name mentioned because he was not authorized to speak on the matter, told Vanguard.
After the application was withdrawn, a three-person panel headed by Justice Joseph Ikyegh dismissed it.
Specifically, Atiku had in the withdrawn application, which he predicated on 11 grounds, maintained that it was necessary for agents of his party to be present during the sorting out of the electoral materials he would need to prepare a petition he intends to lodge against the outcome of the presidential election.
In accordance with the ex-parte order the court issued on March 3, he claimed it was necessary for his agents to watch and/or assist in the sorting of the materials he requested in all of INEC’s national offices.
The tribunal had in the said order, directed INEC to allow the Applicants, Atiku and PDP, to inspect, scan, and carry out forensic examination and analysis of the ballot papers, data form, BVAS/and or card readers, including photocopying of the ballot papers, information stored in the computer server/IREV.
Atiku claimed that permitting his party’s representatives to be present while the materials are sorted would promote transparency and ensure that the ballots would not be tampered with.
It will be recalled that though the court ordered INEC to grant both Atiku and his counterpart in the Labour Party, LP, Peter Obi, who came third in the election, access to the electoral materials, however, in a subsequent order it made on March 8, the panel gave the electoral body the nod to reconfigure the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, BVAS, machines it used for the presidential election.
The judge determined that preventing INEC from reconfiguring the BVAS would have a negative impact on how the Governorship and State Assembly elections scheduled for Saturday would be conducted.
The LP’s and its presidential candidate, Obi, voiced concerns about INEC’s decision to reconfigure all of the BVAS devices used for the presidential election, but those concerns were dismissed.
According to the court, allowing the objections by Obi and his party would amount to “tying the hands of the Respondent, INEC”.
It stated that the affidavit depositions made by INEC, which stated that the accreditation data in the BVAS could not be altered or lost because it would be stored and readily accessible from its back-end server, were uncontested.
Additionally, the court ordered INEC to permit the President-elect of the APC, Tinubu, to view and acquire copies of the electoral materials so that he could prepare his defense against any petitions that might be filed to annul his election victory.
It was decided that Tinubu and his party had a right to view the voting materials.
17 other candidates ran for president, but Tinubu of the APC was named the victor by INEC.
According to INEC, Tinubu, scored a total of 8,794,726 votes to defeat Atiku who polled a total of 6,984,520 votes, and Obi of the LP who came third with a total of 6,101,533 votes.
Both PDP and LP had since rejected the outcome of the election and vowed to challenge it in court.
Under the Electoral Act 2022, any candidate dissatisfied with the return made by the INEC, shall within 21 days after the date of the declaration of the result of the election, file a petition before the tribunal.
An election tribunal shall deliver its judgement in writing within 180 days from the date the petition was filed.
