admin

The Independent National Electoral Commission has been ordered by the Federal High Court in Lagos to electronically and directly transfer the results of the upcoming governorship and state House of Assembly elections in Lagos State from the polling places to the IReV.

The Labour Party and 41 other parties had sued, seeking a mandamus order to compel INEC to follow the Electoral Act and its rules for the conduct of the elections. Justice Peter Lifu issued the order in his judgment on the case.

The judge determined that because the lawsuit was filed in conformity with the law’s provisions, the court had the authority to hear it.

Additionally, he determined that the relief requested by the applicants has nothing to do with election administration and instead deals with election preparation.

The applicants’ only goal, according to Justice Lifu, was to force the electoral board to observe the Constitution, its rules, and directives after it did not during the presidential and National Assembly elections held on February 25.

Therefore the court granted the applicants “an order of mandamus directing and compelling the defendant and all its agents and their privies or any persons acting under their directions to comply with and enforce the provision of Clause 37 of the Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022 for the conduct of the governorship and House of Assembly elections in Lagos State on 11 March 2023, to wit: Mandating the Presiding Officer of all Polling Units to paste the Publication of Result Poster EC60(E) at the Polling Units conspicuously after completing the EC8A result sheet.”

Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, has put together a legal team of 19 Senior Advocates of Nigeria to challenge the outcome of the February 25 election.

On Wednesday, Atiku briefed them at the Abuja headquarters of his campaign, urging them to “prove the charge of illegality in the election and recapture the mandate of the Nigerian people.”

JK Gadzama, a veteran litigator and commercial attorney, is in charge of the group.

He continued by saying that completing this process was essential not only for him and the PDP but also for strengthening constitutional democracy and preserving it for future generations.

The list of SANs includes Chief Chris Uche, Paul Usoro, Tayo Jegede, Ken Mozia, Chief Mike Ozekhome, Mahmood Magaji, Joe Abraham, Chukwuma Umeh, Garba Tetengi and Chief Emeka Etiaba – as well as Chief Goddy Uche, Professor Maxwell Gidado; PDP’s National Legal Adviser A.K. Ajibade; O.M. Atoyebi; Nella Rabana; Paul Ogbole; Nuremi Jimoh and Abdul Ibrahim.

According to reports, Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi of the Labour Party have refused to accept loss in the presidential election held on February 25 and have vowed to reclaim their mandate in court.

In his acceptance speech after being named the winner of the election on Wednesday, Bola Tinubu requested the two candidates to join him in the effort to improve the country, but the gesture of reconciliation was rejected by the two contenders.

The Independent National Electoral Commission proclaimed 70-year-old Tinubu the winner of the election after he received 8,794,726 votes, beating out Atiku and Obi, who received 6,984,520 and 6,101 votes, respectively.

According to reports, Atiku and Obi each went to the Presidential Election Court to request permission to inspect the election materials that were utilized during the presidential election.

Atiku and Obi were given permission last Friday by the Court of Appeal in Abuja to access all of the sensitive papers used to conduct the election.

The ruling was issued by a panel of the appellate court chaired by Justice Joseph Ikyegh after it heard two separate ex parte applications that the two presidential candidates who were unhappy with the outcome submitted together with their political parties.

INEC, the All Progressives Congress, and Bola Tinubu, the party’s presidential candidate who won the election and is now the president-elect, were named as respondents in the case.

Both requests were supported by Section 146 (1) of the Electoral Act of 2022, Paragraphs 47 (1, 2 & 3) of the First Schedule of the Electoral Act of 2022, as well as the court’s inherent jurisdiction, which was cited in Sections 6 (6) A & B of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).