PEPC Affirms Obi’s Membership Of LP,  Says Membership Internal Affair Of Party

By Ayodele Oni

The Presidential Election Petition Court, (PEPC) has settled two objections raised by Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima against the Labour Party, (LP) Presidential candidate, Peter Obi in his favour.

The tribunal declared APC’s petition challenging Obi’s membership of the LP, as incompetent.

Justice Abba says membership in a political party is an internal affair.

The second is on whether his petition was valid as he did not join the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Atiku Abubakar.

Justices Abba Mohammed, a member of the five-man panel who read the ruling on the case, faulted Tinubu and Shettima’s contention challenging Mr Obi’s membership of the Labour Party.

The judge said a petitioner is not under any obligation to join a candidate who lost the election like himself in his petition.

He said a petitioner is only obligated to join the person and the political party who won the election and the commission who conducted the election as parties to his petition.

Justice Mohammed highlighted a contention by the respondents that Mr Obi’s petition only alleged widespread irregularities without giving the particulars of the polling units.

He agreed that Peter Obi only made generic allegations. He said spreadsheets, inspection reports and forensic analysis filed with the petition during trial were not served on the respondents.

Justice Mohammed also said Obi and his Labour party failed to provide particulars of corrupt practices, suppression of votes, entry of fictitious results and other irregularities in their pleadings.

Meanwhile, it highlighted a claim by the respondents that Obi’s petition only alleged that there were widespread irregularities without giving the particulars and the polling units.

Justice Abba Mohammed holds that in a presidential election held in 176,866 polling units in 774 Local Government Areas, it would be improper not to specify where there were irregularities.

According to him, the petitioners only made generic allegations.

“Pleading must set out material facts and particulars. In the instant petition, there was no effort to prove specific allegations, particulars of complaints.

“The law is clear that where someone alleges irregularities in a particular polling unit, such person must prove the particular irregularities in that polling unit before that petition can succeed.”

The court said the petitioners did not prove the particular polling unit where the election did not take place nor did they specify particulars of polling units where there are alleged complainants of irregularities.

“It was only in one instance that figures were given of alleged suppressed votes and we all know that elections are about figures.

“LP alleged that INEC reduced their scores and added it to APC votes but failed to supply particulars of what they actually scored before the said reductions, neither did they supply the polling units where it happened.”