Live Account Of How The Supreme Court Dismissed Atiku’s  Appeal Challenging President Tinubu’s Presidential Victory

9:20 a.m.: Members of the Supreme Court panel led by Chairman Justice John Okoro file into the courtroom.

9:22 a.m.: Registrar calls, PDP Candidate, Atiku Abubakar’s appeal.

Atiku Abubakar’s lawyer, Chris Uche (SAN), announces their appearance.

9:25 a.m: Abdullahi Aliyu (SAN) announces appearance for INEC.

09:26 a.m. A lawyer, Akintola Makinde, from the law firm of Wole Olanipekun (SAN), announces an appearance for President Bola Tinubu.

09: 29 a.m.: A lawyer, Olumide Olujinmi, announces appearance for APC.

09:30 a.m.: The Presiding Justice of the Panel, John Okoro, begins reading the lead judgment on Atiku’s appeal.

*9:33 a.m.: Mr Okoro gives a background to the appeal.

9.35 a.m.:The Justice recaps the issues that came up at the Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja.

The issues include alleged electoral fraud, President Tinubu’s non-qualification, and non-compliance of the conduct of the disputed election with the provisions of the Electoral Act.

9:38 a.m.: Justice Okoro said on 18 September, Atiku filed a notice of appeal with 35 grounds of appeal, while on 7th October, the respondents filed their reply.

9.39 a.m.: The Court is now dealing with the application by Atiku to file additional evidence – the deposition of an official of the Chicago State University.

One of Atiku’s grounds for challenging Tinubu’s appeal was that the President was not qualified to run for office on account of forged academic records.

9:42 a.m.: Justice Okoro recounts Atiku’s legal battle in the US to obtain Tinubu’s academic records from the CSU.

9.47 a.m.: The Justice finishes highlighting the 20 grounds on which Atiku anchored the application.

Justice Okoro says Mr Tinubu filed an 11-paragraph counter-affidavit to Atiku’s application to tender fresh evidence against the president.

President Bola Tinubu’s lead lawyer, Wole Olanipekun, filed a written address against Atiku’s move to bring in new evidence before the Supreme Court against Mr Tinubu.

9.52 a.m.: Mr Okoro says the pivotal question to ask is whether Nigerian laws allow this Court to receive and act on this document at this stage.

9:54 a.m:n Justice Okoro recalls Chris Uche (SAN), Atiku’s law document regarding the difficulty in obtaining Mr. Tinubu’s academic records from the Chicago State University.

INEC’s lawyer, Abubakar Mahmoud, argues that allegations of forgery are criminal in nature, to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. This appeal being ii on election matter, the  implication is that all evidence ought to have been adduced at the trial court and jujudgment delivered within 180 days, Justice Okoro recalled.

10: 01: am Justice Okoro said, Mr Olanipekun argued that the Supreme Court lacked the power to consider Atiku’s fresh evidence against Mr Tinubu.

The failure to invite the APC and INEC to participate in the Court proceedings in the US aimed at obtaining Mr. Tinubu’s academic records from CSU renders the fresh evidence inadmissible, Mr Olanipekun argued in the court’s decision being read by Mr Okoro.

Justice Okoro recalled Mr. O.lanipekun’s argument instead of Mr. R. T.inubu.

10.05 a.m.: Justice Okoro begins reviewing arguments on the issue of fresh evidence tendered by Atiku.

He decides on the issue from the point of whether or not the court has jurisdiction to accept the new evidence.

The jurisdiction of the court is at the foundation of adjudication, the Justice said.

Jurisdiction clothes the court the power to determine cases, he says.

10.08 a.m.: Justice Okoro says jurisdiction is the fulcrum upon which every court decision is based.

Justice Okoro says, it must be emphasized that it is trite that election proceedings are their unique class.

This court has to take into account the peculiarity of this case.

I have carefully perused the record of Appeal, he says.

He said Atiku filed the appeal on the last day of the time frame allowed to appeal.

The 180 days prescribed by the law lapsed on 17th September, Justice Okoro noted.

10.11 a.m.: Justice Okoro recalled an earlier decision of the Supreme Court which said, “In the circumstance of this case, this court cannot activate section 22 of the Supreme Court Act to admit fresh evidence.”

The application runs foul of 14 of the Evidence Act.

10.15 a.m.: “I still wonder how the  apappellant intend to use the document in this proceeding,” says Mr O.koro.

The petitioner shall not be allowed to amend their petition after the 21 days allowed by law, the Justice says.

Citing Section 182 of the Electoral Act, Justice Okoro said, “Atiku failed to apply to the Court to amend his petition to bring the fresh evidence” against Mr T.inubu.

10.18 a.m.: It is shocking to have Atiku’s lawyer argue in print that there is no statutory time limit of 180 days for the lower court to decide a presidential election petition.

10.19 a.m. It will be unfortunate to go back to the dark old days when election petitions could be heard up to the point of expiration of the tenure of the person whose election was being challenged, Justice Okoro says of Atiku’s attempt to introduce fresh evidence to extend the time to adjudicate the case. Consequently since the Presidential Election court has no jurisdiction to entertain fresh evidence, the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to accept fresh evidence, Justice Okoro says.

119.20 a.m. “It has to be noted that the 180 days imposed is immutable and cannot be extended,”  Justice Okoro said.

10.23 a.m: “The jurisdiction of this court is donated by the Constitution.

One wonders what Atiku intends to do when none of his grounds of appeal is hinged on forgery of the certificate against Mr .Tinubu.

“Finally, on this application, fresh evidence is not received as a matter of cause.”

10.26 a.m.: “Atiku failed to convince the Supreme Court why he waited until the PEPC concluded the appellant’s suit and lost jurisdiction before attempting to tender the document.”

10.29 a.m. The court dismissed Atiku’s application to tender fresh evidence.

10.30 a.m.:  The court is now set to deal with the merit of the substantive appeal.

11:27 a.m.: “Success or failure in an election depends on votes,  Okoro says, restating the decision of the Presidential Election Petition.

11:29: a.m.: “I have earlier resolved the issue of transmission of results which is the main thrust of the appellant’s case, he adds.

“In this appeal, the issue before us is not about the candidate who scored he majority

“I am unable to find any figure put forward by Atiku that he scored the majority votes, other than the figures declared by INEC declaring the second respondent (Tinubu) winner of the election.

11:23 a.m.: “The votes before us show that the second respondent Tinubu won the election, Justice Okoro says.

11:33 a.m.: Finally, on the issue of the of disparaging words by the lower court on the appellant.

“The words of the court were not meant to disparage the appellant”, he says.

11:35 a.m.: Having resolved all the issues against the appellant there is no merit in this appeal.

The judgment of the lower court delivered on 6 September declaring Tinubu president is hereby affirmed, Justice Okoro says.