As the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal continues its proceedings in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nigerians remain vigilant and attentive to the developments. Barrister Eze Eluchie, a well-known lawyer and political analyst, has voiced his opinion, emphasizing that the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) made a mistake by refusing to present its defense against the petitions filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.
During the court session on July 5, 2023, the APC’s legal representatives informed the five-man panel of Appeal Court judges that they would not present a defense against the PDP’s petitions, asserting that there was no need to pursue a futile effort. Essentially, they deemed the PDP’s case as lacking seriousness, hence their decision not to engage in further legal proceedings.
However, during an interview on Voice Of the People FM, Barrister Eze Eluchie expressed his disagreement with the APC’s approach. He argued that the party’s refusal to present a defense was merely a tactic to gain public approval, disregarding the significant constitutional issues raised by the PDP’s petitions that warrant judicial attention and resolution.
In his words: “The APC’s statement that it will not enter its defense, is just playing to the gallery. Because there are very critical issues that are in the purview of the public and which point to the fact that the party has a herculean task to overcome to uphold its election victory at the Tribunal. First of all, they have the issue of the mandatory 25% FCT votes which their candidate did not get.
He added:”The second issue is the forfeiture of over four hundred thousand Dollars by the party’s flag bearer. What the Constitution provides for is if the person has paid a fine for any offense bordering on fraud and dishonesty. These are the exact terms used by the Constitution. It didn’t say that there has to be a conviction, but rather, a fine being paid by the candidate. And by all definitions, a fine is also forfeiture. So, the posture of the APC that they have nothing to defend is just merely playing to the gallery when substantial Constitutional issues are being raised by the petitioners at the tribunal.”
Eluchie maintained that there are crucial constitutional matters at stake, and it is important for the tribunal to address them rather than dismiss the case outright. By highlighting the need for judicial redress, he implied that the APC’s decision to avoid a defense was a missed opportunity to address substantial legal concerns and provide a fair and thorough examination of the PDP’s claims.
https://www.youtube.com/live/Qn0hkzZwJOU?feature=share. (Watch video from 12:55)
What is your take on this?
Jesusbabe (
)
