Atiku, Obi, lose bid for live broadcast of PEPC proceedings

 

 

Chigozie Ikpo, Abuja with agency report

 

The Presidential Election Petition Court, Abuja on Monday, dismissed a motion filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party, seeking the live telecast of proceedings of the court.

 

Delivering the unanimous rulling on behalf of the five-member panel of the Court, Justice Haruna Tsammani dismissed the application on the ground that it “is devoid of merit”.

 

Justice Tsammani said the motion for Live streaming is noble and unprecedented, adding that no part of the law supports the live broadcast of the proceedings of the law court.

 

The Court also dismissed a similar motion filed by Mr. Peter Obi and the Labour Party, for the live telecast of proceedings due to the national importance of the case.

 

Justice Tsammani said the law states that “the court proceedings must be held in public”, but that it does not mean it will be held in a market square”

 

He further held that not granting the order does not go against the right of fair hearing for any of the parties and granting it does not also advance it.

 

He said “The court can only be guided in accordance to the constitution. There is nowhere the rules of the Court permits the live telecast of proceedings therefore, thus court has no power to grant such orders.

This panel only has the power to hear the petition before us”

Justice Tsammani therefore dismissed the petitions in its entirety.

The court in a similar ruling, dismissed the application of the Labour Party, and its presidential candidate,Mr Peter Obi for live broadcast of court proceedings. In a unanimous decision, the five-member panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani held that the court, as constituted, did not have the powers or vires to make such an order since it was an issue of policy.

The judges held that such an order needed to be planned for ahead of time and budgeted for.  Besides, the five judges agreed that both the team of Atiku and Obi did not tell the court what they stood to lose if the request was not granted. The judges held that live televising of proceedings was not provided for in any law.

They held that the court was created to hear election petitions and anything outside of that was going beyond its scope. The court also held that the request was novel and not supported by any law in the country presently.

Justice Tsammani also said that the request was not rooted from the petition Atiku or Obi filed before the court. The court ruled that the request was capable of turning the court into a stadium or market square and that such must not be allowed.

Besides, Justice Tsammani held that granting the request for live telecast of the proceedings of the petitions would not add any value to the petition.

“The undue pressure of allowing cameras into the courtroom should be avoided as the impact it would have on witnesses cannot be predicted. The court is created to find out the truth and should be allowed to do so,” Justice Tsammani said.

The judge said that in the final analysis, the petition was without merit and subsequently dismissed it. The News Agency of Nigeria, (NAN) reports that Atiku and Obi had approached the court hearing their petition against the outcome of the Feb. 25 presidential polls for an order allowing live broadcast of the day to day proceedings.

They both said the request for live broadcast was predicated on the grounds that the petitions were of monumental importance to the nation. Atiku and the PDP as well as Obi and the Labour Party had in their separate applications specifically prayed the court for an order directing the court’s registry and the parties on modalities for admission of media practitioners and their equipment into the courtroom.

.Election court ruling on live broadcast not a setback, says Atiku, PDP

Similarly the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its Presidenrial Candidate in the Feb. 25 election, Atiku Abubakar, on Monday, said that the dismissal of their application for a live broadcast by the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) was not a setback to their petition against Sen. Bola Tinubu, the President-elect.

Counsel to PDP and Abubakar, Mr Eyitayo Jegede, SAN, stated this while fielding questions from newsmen shortly after the PEPC’s decision.

“There is no setback here. The court, in its wisdom  decided that the subject of our application on the live streaming and open telecast did not, in any way, connected with the merit of our petition.

“The petition is separate; it is ongoing. The application did not succeed to have the televised version of the proceedings.

“As far as we are concerned, we are now set for hearing.

“Tomorrow, we will be hear by God’s grace for pre-hearing report that will determine the progress of the petition and the time the petition will be heard and concluded,” Jegede said.

On whether they still had confidence in the court, the senior lawyer simply said: “For us, we are prepared for hearing.”

On the issue of consolidation of the whole petitions, he said it was one that was compelled by statute and that they had no objection to it.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) earlier reported that the PEPC dismissed the applications by the two presidential candidates, Abubakar and Peter Obi of Labour Party and their parties for a live televised of the proceedings for lacking in merit.

.Tinubu, APC, oppose consolidation of Atiku, Obi, APM petitions as court adjourns till tomorrow

Meanwhile, the President-Elect, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) has opposed a plan by the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) Abuja, to consolidate the three petitions challenging the outcome of the February 25 elections in line with Paragraph 50 of the first schedule to the Electoral Act.

The Justice Haruna Tsammani-led panel also adjourned proceedings in the petition filed by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) seeking the disqualification of Tinubu, for going against the provisions of the Electoral Act is his use of Kabiru Masari as a placeholder before the elections.

The petition marked: CA/PEPC/03/2023 has the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the All Progressives Congress (APC), Tinubu and Kashim Shettima and Masari listed as 1st to 5th respondents.

In Mondays proceedings, Counsel for APM, S. A. Abubakar said the parties met, excluding counsels for the 1st and 5th respondents and agreed to allocate 20 minutes for the examination in chief of the star witness, 25 minutes for cross-examination and further 5 minutes for re-examination.

 

He said the other witnesses would take 10 minutes for examination, 15 for cross-examination and 5 minutes for re-examination.

 

Abubakar said they would present one witness and requested for two days to present their case.

 

Kemi Pilero (SAN), Charles Edosomwan (SAN) Akin Olujimi (SAN) and Rowland Otaru (SAN) representing INEC, APC, Tinubu/Shetimma and Masari representing the 1st to 5th respondents respectively, agreed with his submission on time allocation.

 

While INEC said they needed one day to present their one witness, APC said they need 5 days to present one witness to defend their case. Tinubu and Shetimma asked for 4 days to present 5 witnesses while Masari requested for one day to present one witness.

 

On the proposal to consolidate the three petitions, by Atiku and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Peter Obi and the Labour Party (LP) and the APM, Abubakar did not oppose the motion.

 

The APC represented by Chief Charles Edosomwan (SAN) told the court that consolidating the petitions is not in the interest of justice.

 

Edosomwan said the grounds in the various petitions are not aligned and the issues are not the same, which makes consolidation of the petitions is against the justice point of the case.

 

“The trial will be unwinding, I have numerous witnesses and so do other parties, if the petitions are consolidated, various facts of the case will be lost and we will not be able to prove our case well” he said

 

Counsel for Tinubu and Shetimma, Olujimi (SAN) and Otaru (SAN) representing Masari aligned themselves with the submissions of Edosomwan adding that the said Act gives a clause to its implementation especially when it is not in the interest of Justice to all parties involved.

 

He said that since exercise of the powers in Paragraph 50 of the first schedule of the Electoral Act, is subject to some limitation, consolidation cannot be mandatory.

 

Counsel to INEC said they are bound by the decision of the Court and aligns to her discretion.

 

Also speaking at the resumed session, Counsel to Atiku and the PDP, Eyitayo Jegede (SAN) said the party do not oppose the consolidation of the three petitions

 

Awa Kalu (SAN) representing Obi and the Labour Party (LP) said the party is in support of whichever decision the court makes in respect to consolidation of the cases.

 

The court reminded him that he was yet to speak on time allocation for witnesses as they are to present their pre-hearing report tomorrow.

 

Kalu told the court that they still have difficulty of documents as INEC was yet to allow them have physical inspection of the BVAS machine which has made them unable to give their position on time allocation for witnesses as the said witnesses are to speak on the documents.

 

Reacting to this, Pilero representing INEC said they have assured the LP team that more documents are waiting for collection in the states upon payment of the requisite fees.

 

He said “In respect to the inspection on the BVAS machine, every data has been transfered to the back ends and that information has been made available to them.”

 

The court held Pilero by his word and asked him to ensure he fulfills his promise, after the LP legal team pointed out that such promises have been made in the past.

 

Justice Tsammani then adjourned till tomorrow, May 23 for presentation of pre-hearing report.