The All Progressives Congress (APC) has asserted that Abubakar Atiku and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) failed to present credible evidence to support their claim that the presidential election held on February 25 was rigged in favor of President Bola Tinubu.
The party also stated that the evidence presented by Peter Obi and the Labour Party against Mr. Tinubu lacked credibility and was insignificant.
Abubakar, Obi, and their respective parties have challenged Tinubu’s victory at the Presidential Election Petition Court.
Read Also Breaking: Court orders Ecobank to pay Honeywell N72.2bn, after 8-year battle
In its final brief of argument filed through its team of lawyers led by Lateef Fagbemi, the APC argued that Abubakar and the PDP were not entitled to the reliefs they sought in their petition.
The party claimed that the petitioners merely submitted documents to the court and claimed that those documents were sufficient evidence to prove their allegations.
The APC further contended that the petitioners failed to demonstrate a connection between the documents and the specific allegations made against Tinubu’s victory.
According to the APC, it is not enough to merely identify exhibits; the relevance of the exhibits should be demonstrated by correlating them with the depositions of adopted witnesses.
The party stated that, except for the non-qualification allegation raised against Tinubu, all other allegations in the petition should have been presented on a polling unit basis or proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Read Also APC Reacts As CJN Allegedly Tells Tinubu To Prepare For Rerun
Regarding Tinubu’s educational qualification, the party argued that the exhibits tendered in court only confirmed that he attended Chicago State University in the United States and graduated with honors. The APC also stated that the petitioners failed to produce the genuine certificate from which the alleged forged certificate was made.
The party dismissed the allegation of Tinubu’s involvement in drug dealing and money laundering, highlighting the lack of evidence of criminal charges, convictions, or fines against him.
Furthermore, the party mentioned that Tinubu’s criminal and immigration records in the possession of the United States would not be released until 2026, as previously reported by Ejes Gist News.
Addressing the allegation of dual citizenship, the APC argued that possessing a Guinean passport was not sufficient grounds to disqualify Tinubu or nullify his election. The party emphasized that Tinubu was a bona fide Nigerian citizen by birth, not by registration or naturalization.
The APC stressed that acquiring dual citizenship of a second country does not strip a Nigerian-born citizen of their Nigerian citizenship or their right to vote or be voted for in Nigeria.
The APC also noted that Tinubu’s sole witness had testified to the president’s Nigerian citizenship.
The court concluded the hearing in Abubakar’s petition on July 4, as the respondents closed their defense. Abubakar and the PDP had requested the court to nullify Tinubu’s election and revoke the certificate of return issued to him by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Abubakar and the PDP presented 27 witnesses instead of the initially announced 100, while Obi called 13 out of the 50 witnesses and submitted numerous documents, including over 18,000 blurred results sheets used by INEC to declare Tinubu’s electoral victory.
INEC and Tinubu each called one witness. The APC, however, chose not to call any witnesses, as they believed it would be redundant.
