Obi informed the court on Wednesday that two of his senior staff members had unexpectedly been unwell. His team of attorneys was led by Prof. Awa Kalu, SAN.
He claimed that the two, who were described as being part of his legal secretariat’s “engine room,” were ill, which interfered with his plans to present crucial documents to the court to support his claim that President Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressive Congress, APC, had the election rigged in his favor.
“My lords, our plan for today’s proceedings was to start with the presentation of our documents, but unfortunately, we had some unexpected development.
“The unexpected development concerns the sudden illness of two of our key staff, for which reason I am constrained to ask for an adjournment till tomorrow.
“It is with the greatest humility and apology that we make this application.
“I assure my lords that we will be here tomorrow morning and we will proceed with vigour,” Prof. Kalu, SAN, pleaded.
Obi’s lawyer alerted President Tinubu’s main attorney, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, of the development prior to the start of the five-member panel’s hearing, which was presided over by Justice Haruna Tsammani.
Chief Olanipekun, SAN, President Tinubu’s attorney, responded by telling the court that he was not opposed to the request for a continuance.
Prince Lateef Fagbemi, counsel for the APC, and Mr. Abubakar Mahmood, SAN, who represented the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, both stated that they were equally open to the plea.
The respondents asked the court to reduce the three weeks that were initially scheduled for Obi to submit his case by one day, nevertheless.
Justice Tsammani made a swift decision to accept the application and postpone the petition until Thursday.
Remember that Obi and the LP had said they would call a total of 50 witnesses in the case?
Obi specifically argues that Tinubu was not the legitimate victor of the presidential election in the joint petition he filed with the LP. Obi finished third in the election.
In the CA/PEPC/03/2023 case, the petitioners similarly argued that President Tinubu lacked the necessary qualifications to run for office.
The petitioners contend that Kashim Shettima, Tinubu’s running partner, was still the APC’s choice for the Borno Central Senatorial seat at the moment Tinubu switched to running for vice president.
The petitioners further contested Tinubu’s eligibility to run for president, claiming that he had previously been charged with fraud and drug trafficking and fined $460,000 by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Case No: 93C 4483.
The petitioners stated that INEC operated in violation of its own Regulations and Guidelines on the grounds that the election was unlawful due to corrupt activities and non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.
The petitioners argued that the electoral body was legally required to establish and implement technological devices for the accreditation, verification, continuation, and authentication of voters and their information as specified in its Regulations during the conduct of the presidential election.
Because of his disqualification or non-qualification, they are asking the court, among other things, to declare that all the votes cast for Tinubu and the APC were wasted votes.
“That it be determined that on the basis of the remaining votes (after discountenancing the votes credited to the 2nd Respondent) the 1st Petitioner (Obi) scored a majority of the lawful votes cast at the election and had not less than 25% of the votes cast in at least 2/3 of the States of the Federation, and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, and satisfied the constitutional requirements to be declared the winner of the 25th February 2023 presidential election.
“That it be determined that the 2nd Respondent having failed to score one-quater of the votes cast at the presidential election in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, was not entitled to be declared and returned as the winner of the presidential election held on 25th February, 2023.
Alternately, the petitioners are asking for a ruling that declares the election void and orders INEC to hold a new election in which Tinubu, Shettima, and the APC, who are named as the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th respondents, respectively, are not allowed to run.
They requested the court to rule that Tinubu’s return as the winner of the presidential election was illegal, unconstitutional, and had no bearing at all because he had not been properly elected by a majority of the valid votes cast in the election.
The petitioners further ask the court to declare that the presidential election was invalid since it was not substantially conducted in line with the terms of the Electoral Act of 2022 and the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
An order “cancelling the presidential election conducted on February 25, 2023 and mandating the first respondent to conduct a new election for President, Federal Republic of Nigeria” is also required.
On Wednesday, Obi and Baba Ahmed Datti, his vice presidential candidate, were both present in court to watch the proceedings.
The court will resume further hearing on the case brought by Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, candidate Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who finished second in the presidential election, at 2 p.m.
