After an almost 10-hour ruling,
Nigeria’s Appeal Court has thrown out the petitions by the two main challengers of Bola Tinubu’s victory in February’s presidential election – for lack of merit.
Despite the election challenge, Tinubu was sworn into office on May 29. Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party and Peter Obi of the Labour Party had alleged widespread fraud.
The election was the most fiercely contested since the end of military rule in 1999, with three strong candidates for the first time.
Tinubu polled 37% of votes cast, Atiku secured 29% and Obi got 25%.
Presidential spokesman Ajuri Ngelale said President Tinubu welcomed the judgment “with an intense sense of solemn responsibility and preparedness to serve all Nigerians.”
“(It) reflects the continuing maturation of Nigeria’s legal system, and the advancement of Africa’s largest democracy at a time when our democratic system of government is under test in other parts of the continent,” Ngelale said in a statement.
Ahead of the ruling, security was beefed up in the capital, Abuja.
In spite of warnings from authorities against protests, various political groups gathered outside the courthouse, chanting and dancing.
The ruling coincides with his 100 days in office, the focus will be on the Supreme Court where the dissatisfied opponents are likely to appeal against this judgement.
The Labour Party has rejected the ruling.
“We reject the outcome of the judgment in its entirety because justice was not served,” party spokesman Obiora Ifoh said in a statement quoted by local media.
However, Tinubu is likely to stay more confident, due to the unanimous verdict of the judges at the Appeal Court.
This was already noticeable as he was not even in the country for Wednesday’s ruling, travelling to India for the G20 summit where he has secured $14 Billion investment pledge by Indian investors.
While reading the verdict, lead justice Haruna Tsammani said “the petitioners failed to prove allegations of corrupt practices and over-voting”.
Justice Tsammani added that:
- the petitioners failed to specify the polling units where they alleged that rigging took place
- the petitioners failed to provide any credible evidence to prove their allegations of suppression of votes in their strongholds
- the electoral commission was not bound to transmit results electronically
- and failure to upload the photographic copies of polling unit results in real time did not invalidate the election.