Godwin Tsa, Abuja

The presidential election petition tribunal has reserved judgment in the petition brought by the Hope Democratic Party and its presidential candidate, Ambrose Owuru challenging the conduct and outcome of the February 23, election.

This followed the adoption of final written addresses by parties to the petition.
Adopting his processes, counsel for the petitioners, Chukwunoyerem  Njoku urged the tribunal to set aside the election on the ground that Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) did not follow condition precedent stipulated in the Electoral Act before postponing the election earlier scheduled for February 16.
It is the case of the petitioners that following the unconstitutional postponement of the said election, a referendum was conducted in accordance with the law and its presidential candidate,  Ambrose Oworu emerged winner of the referendum with over fifty million votes.
Njoku informed the tribunal that  Nigerian citizen participated in the February 16,  2019 referendum as required by law.
He, therefore, urged the tribunal to nullify the declaration of President Buhari by INEC as president and in his place restore owuru as the authentic winner of the referendum.
But president Buhari through his lead counsel, Wole Olanikpekun (SAN), urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition on the grounds that it is frivolous, baseless and lacking in merit.
Besides,  Olanipekun told the tribunal that the petitioners did not in any way adduce evidence on how the referendum was conducted and who conducted it in line with the provisions of the law.
Buhari further told the tribunal that he had studied carefully the final address of the petitioners and there was nowhere the made any case against president him.
On its part, the INEC,  through its lead counsel, Yunus  Usman (SAN), had while adopting his final address, urged the tribunal to dismiss the petition with substantial cost to serve as a deterrent to those who may which to file frivolous and baseless petitions in the 2023 elections.
Usman argued that the petition lacked merit because the electoral body conducted an election and not a referendum and that the claims of the two petitioners are strange to the electoral umpire.
He therefore urged the tribunal to uphold the declaration of President Muhammadu Buhari as winner of the February 23 lawful presidential election.
The All progressive Congress (APC), represented by former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Chief Akin Olujimi (SAN) demanded for a dismissal of the petition for lacking in merit and wholly misconceived by the two petitioners.
Owuru and the HDP had in their petition filed on March 7, 2019 canvassed nullification of the election of President Buhari on three grounds; that they were unlawfully excluded in the poll, that the February 23 poll was illegal, unconstitutional and a nullity because INEC has no power to shift the poll and that a referendum conducted on February 16 produced him as winner.
The party called only one witness, Yusuf Ibrahim and closed its case against INEC, Buhari and the APC.
In his evidence-in-chief, Ibrahim asked the tribunal to declare candidate of the HDP, Chief Albert Ambrose Owuru the winner of the 2019 presidential election and that he should be so inaugurated.
The witness predicated his call for Declaration of Owuru as president on a referendum conducted in the country on February 16, the day the presidential election was initially slated.
Ibrahim, who was led in evidence by HDP’s lawyer, Eze Nnayelugo, told the tribunal that a referendum conducted on February 16 placed Owuru winner by over 50m Nigerians.
The witness attacked the shift of the presidential election from February 16 to February 23 by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and described the election of February 23 as illegal, unconstitutional and a nullity because conditions president for shifting election were not met by INEC.
Ibrahim further informed the Tribunal that ‘Citizens Observers Referendum Election Rights Protection of Nigeria’ conducted the referendum across the country and that Owuru of the HDP won and emerged as Nigeria’s president.
The witness insisted that the referendum was held physically and not in the spiritual realms as claimed by President Muhammadu Buhari, All Progressives Congress (APC) and INEC.
Ibrahim tendered some documents, among which are; Citizens Observers Referendum Election Rights Protection of Nigeria, Final List of Presidential Candidate and copies of major newspapers to buttress his claim on the referendum.
Besides, the witness also alleged unlawful exclusion of the HDP in the February 23 poll by INEC refusal to put its original logo on the ballot papers as done to other parties by INEC.
Under cross examination by INEC’s lawyer, Yunus Usman SAN, the witness admitted that INEC has sole responsibility of conducting election for the country but however said that the electoral body lacked powers to shift the election the way it did on February 16, which he said prompted Nigerians to opt for a referendum.
However, when asked to produce the results of the referendum before the Tribunal, Ibrahim said it was not with him in the Tribunal, and that he has submitted it to his lawyer.
Also when cross examined by APC’s lawyer, Akin Olujimi SAN, the witness said that the referendum of February 16 was not celestial exercise or through the internet, adding that it was a physical exercise.
Attempt by the HDP to call another witness, who was subpoenaed was unsuccessful because the witness has no deposition on oath.