Prince Adewole Adebayo, the presidential candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), has offered his opinions on the reasons why Peter Obi, a member of the Labour Party (LP), and Atiku Abubakar, a member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), lost their cases before the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT).
Adebayo claims that the petitioners’ case was unsuccessful because the evidence they submitted in court was inconsistent with what actually occurred during the election.
Adebayo emphasised in an interview with Daily Sun that a petitioner will eventually have their case dismissed if they offer evidence that is irrelevant to the dispute or has no influence on it.
SDP Presidential Candidate, Adebayo Fires Atiku, Peter Obi For Going To Court
He stated that the legal issues Obi and Atiku raised had nothing to do with what transpired during the election.
According to him, “From March when the result was announced till the PEPC began sitting, I kept saying that there are differences between what happened in the field on election day and what is before the court. Your chances of succeeding in court is tied to what you filed and presented to the court and the actual thing that happened in the street.
“The most important thing that will help you at the election is that you have your registered agent and after the election, your agent will collect the result and you as a candidate. As a candidate, will you collate your results and be an Irev for yourself.
“Any time you go to the INEC and the result they announce is different from the one your agent collected, you will take note of it and when you file your petition in court, you go with your result sheets.
Tribunal: Atiku, Peter Obi Should Concede Defeat, Congratulate Tinubu – Adewole Adebayo
“The petitioners went to court to argue about the status of the FCT and the eligibility of the other party’s candidate, the nomination of the vice President band and other things that have no bearing to what happened on election day. What the petitioners went to court to litigate did not relate to what happened at the election; they were litigating constitutional issues and other statutory arguments, that is what is the court decided.”
Follow us on Facebook
Post Disclaimer
The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the author and forum participants on this website do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of Anaedo Online or official policies of the Anaedo Online.