In a significant development, the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) has delivered a ruling that dealt a blow to the petition filed by Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, the Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

Atiku sought to challenge the legitimacy of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s election, but the court made several key determinations in favor of President Tinubu.

Firstly, the PEPC decided to strike out multiple paragraphs of Atiku’s petition that formed the basis for his challenge to President Tinubu’s election. Additionally, the court rejected several exhibits, including statements from witnesses, presented by Atiku to substantiate his claims of irregularities and malpractices during the February 25 presidential election.

Justice Moses Ugoh, presiding over the case, ruled on objections raised by Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) on behalf of President Tinubu. Justice Ugoh found that certain portions of Atiku’s petition lacked the necessary legal foundation to be considered competent.

This included Atiku’s failure to provide essential details, such as locations where ballot boxes were allegedly snatched, the specific methods by which the Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS) machines were manipulated, and the names of polling booths where alleged malpractices occurred.

Furthermore, Atiku, despite claiming to have received the majority of lawful votes, failed to clearly state the total lawful votes he purportedly obtained. Atiku alleged that President Tinubu did not secure the majority of lawful votes but did not specify the exact number of lawful votes he believed President Tinubu had received, leaving this critical information absent from his petition.

The court also found fault with Atiku for making serious allegations against Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello and the Chairman of Olamaboro Local Government in Kogi State, Friday Adejoh, without including them as respondents in the petition. This omission was deemed fatal to the petition, as it denied these individuals the opportunity to defend themselves, as required by law.

The court dismissed allegations of widespread overvoting across Nigeria, as they failed to specify the exact locations where the alleged overvoting occurred, which is a legal requirement.

Additionally, Atiku’s petition was criticized for introducing new facts and allegations in an irregular and unfair manner, surprising the respondents. This tactic was deemed unjust and lacking in transparency.

Justice Stephen Jonah Adah, in a separate ruling on objections against the petition, also expunged several documents submitted by Atiku, as they were created during the pendency of the petition. Furthermore, evidence presented by key witnesses of Atiku was removed from the court record for being presented in a manner inconsistent with legal procedures.

Ultimately, the court determined that Atiku’s unconventional approach in constructing the petition led to the dismissal of multiple paragraphs due to a lack of merit.