A destroyed refinery By Favour Ifeoluwa & Akinola Ajibade The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited( NNPCL) says it has destroyed 134 illegal refineries in the last few weeks. Also, the company said 63 illegal pipeline connections were uncovered during the the weeks . The corporation, In a visual report, stated that at about 2 am on Sunday, a joint team of security agents discovered a large wooden boat illicitly loading stolen crude oil from Barge AGS01 within the OML 18 operating area, noted intelligence report a large wooden wooden boat was caught receiving crude oil from the barge. According to the state-owned oil firm, while the barge was towed away with a tugboat in custody, five speedboats used in towing the large wooden boat to the illegal loading site were also detained and the particulars of the tugboats and barge used for the operation were reportedly seized for further investigation. It further said that two large boats, which involve
By Akinola Ajibade
No fewer than four presidential candidates in the February 25 election are seeking nullification of the poll, which produced the All Progressive Congress APC National Leader, Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the Nigeria's President- Elect.
The candidates and their parties are Alhaji Atiku Abubakar (PDP) of the People Democratic Party ( PDP), Mr Peter Obi, Labour Party (LP) and Allied People's Movement ( APM).
Also joining them at the Presidential Election Petition Court(PEPC) in Abuja to clarify issues surrounding the declaration of Tinubu as the eventual of the election is the nation's umpire- National Independent Electorial Commission (INEC).
Recall that the legal fireworks on the issue began last Tuesday, when the PDP's presidential candidate filed a petition on the issue in Abuja.
In the petition, Atiku, a former Vice President, had claimed that his party won the election by scoring majority votes.
Obi on the other hand is asking the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) to declare him as the authentic winner of the election.
In the petition, filed by his team of lawyers, including 13 Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), among who are Dr. Livy Uzoukwu, Away Kalu, Onyechi Ikpeazu, Chief Sebastian Hon, and Jibrin Okutepa, Obi hinged his request on the grounds that he, and not Tinubu, scored majority of lawful votes cast at the presidential poll.
He further said that Tinubu and his vice president-elect, Kashim Shettima are not supposed to be on the presidential ballot on the grounds that they were not lawfully nominated by their party.
The INEC chairman, Prof Mahmood Yakubu, had on March 1 declared Tinubu as the president-elect.
In the results announced by INEC, Tinubu polled 8,794,726 votes to emerge victorious. Atiku, who came second, scored 6,984,520 votes, while Obi scored 6,101,533 votes.
Dissatisfied with the action of INEC, Obi and his party approached the court to set aside the return of Tinubu as president-elect and declare him winner instead. .
In the petition, marked: CA/PEPC/03/2023 and filed by Uzoukwu, which was predicated on three grounds, among which were that: Tinubu as at the time of the election was not qualified to contest the election; the election of Tinubu was invalid by reason of corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022; and that Tinubu was not duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the presidential election.
While Obi and LP are the petitioners in the suit dated March 20, 2023, INEC, Tinubu, Shettima, and APC are First, Second, Third, and Fourth respondents, respectively.
In the first ground of the petition, Obi and LP argued that the nomination of Shettima as vice president was done in violation of the law and as such should be disqualified.
The LP presidential candidate’s petition read, “The petitioners aver that on July 14, 2022, the third respondent, contrary to the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022, whilst still being a senatorial candidate for Borno Central Constituency, knowingly allowed himself to be nominated as the vice presidential candidate to the second respondent on the platform of the fourth respondent and became the new candidate for the office of the vice president on that date (14 July 2022).
“The petitioners shall rely on Form EC11A signed by the 3rf Respondent and the officials of the 4th Respondent on that same July 14, 2022.”
According to the petitioners, as at the time Shettima purportedly became a vice presidential candidate, he was still the nominated senatorial candidate of APC for the senatorial election for Borno Central Senatorial Constituency.
ThisDay Newspaper reported that the petition said, “It is also the petitioners’ case that a candidate, in this case the 3rd Respondent, shall not knowingly allow himself to be nominated in more than one constituency.
“The petitioners shall contend at the trial that the purported sponsorship of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents by the 4th Respondent was rendered invalid by reason of the 3rd Respondent knowingly allowing himself to be nominated as the Vice Presidential Candidate whilst he was still a Senatorial Candidate for the Borno Central Constituency.
knowingly allowed himself to be nominated as the vice presidential candidate to the second respondent on the platform of the fourth respondent and became the new candidate for the office of the vice president on that date (14 July 2022).
“The petitioners shall rely on Form EC11A signed by the 3rf Respondent and the officials of the 4th Respondent on that same July 14, 2022.”
According to the petitioners, as at the time Shettima purportedly became a vice presidential candidate, he was still the nominated senatorial candidate of APC for the senatorial election for Borno Central Senatorial Constituency.
ThisDay Newspaper reported that the petition said, “It is also the petitioners’ case that a candidate, in this case the 3rd Respondent, shall not knowingly allow himself to be nominated in more than one constituency.
“The petitioners shall contend at the trial that the purported sponsorship of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents by the 4th Respondent was rendered invalid by reason of the 3rd Respondent knowingly allowing himself to be nominated as the Vice Presidential Candidate whilst he was still a Senatorial Candidate for the Borno Central Constituency.
“The petitioners shall further contend that for this reason, the votes purportedly recorded for the 2nd Respondent at the contested presidential election were/are wasted votes and ought to be disregarded”.
Besides, Obi and LP also insisted that Tinubu was “at the time of the election not qualified to contest for election to the office of President as he was fined the sum of $460,000.00 (Four-Hundred and Sixty Thousand United States Dollars) for an offence involving dishonesty, namely narcotics trafficking imposed by the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in Case No: 93C 4483.”
Documents they intend to tender in proving their claim include; a) Verified Complaint for Forfeiture, submitted by Michael J. Shepard (United States Attorney) and signed by Marsha A. McClellan (Assistant United States Attorney);
- b) Stipulations and Compromise Settlement of Claims to the Funds held by Heritage Bank and CitiBank; and c) Decree of Forfeiture as to Funds held by First Heritage Bank, signed by United States District Judge, John A. Nordberg.
“The petitioners shall contend that by reason of the said disqualification of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, the votes purportedly recorded for the 2nd Respondent in the election were/are wasted and invalid; and that the 1st Petitioner who from the correct result of the election obtained the highest number of lawful votes cast in the election and met the constitutional requirements to be declared and returned as the winner of the election, ought to be declared as the winner of the Presidential election held on February 25, 2023.”
The petitioners further contended that it was mandated to do, utilised the scores recorded on the Forms EC8A, as against the fictitious forms uploaded on the IReV, the petitioners would have won Rivers State.
They added, “Similarly, in Benue State, the 1st Respondent whilst suppressing the lawful votes obtained by the Petitioners, announced that the Petitioners scores from the polling units in Benue State is 308,372 votes.
“The 2nd and 4th Respondents’ score was falsely announced as being 310,468 votes. However, the actual scores of the Petitioners from the polling units in Benue State was 329,003 votes, while the 2nd and 4th Respondents’ scores were 300,421 votes.
“The petitioners aver that when the results of Polling Units, Wards, Local Governments, States are properly tabulated and calculated as required by the Electoral Act and the Regulations and Guidelines for election, the overall results of the election and the percentages scored by the Political Parties will show that the Petitioners won the Presidential election of 25 February 2023.
“The petitioners shall rely on a Report of Inspection of the electoral materials pursuant to the orders of this Honourable Court, which orders were made to enable the Petitioners institute and maintain this petition. The orders made by this Honourable Court are hereby pleaded and shall be relied upon at the trial.”
The reliefs they sought from the court included a determination that at the time of the presidential election held on February 25, 2023, Tinubu and Shettima were not qualified to contest the election.
They sought, “That it be determined that all the votes recorded for Tinubu (2nd Respondent) in the election are wasted votes owing to the non-qualification/disqualification of Tinubu and Shettima.
“That it be determined that Tinubu having failed to score one-quarter of the votes cast at the presidential election in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja was not entitled to be declared and returned as the winner of the presidential election held on 25th February, 2023.
“In the alternative to 2 above: an order cancelling the election and compelling INEC to conduct a fresh election at which Tinubu, Shettima and APC shall not participate.
“In the alternative to 1,2,3 above, I) that it may be determined that Tinubu was not duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast in the election for the office of the president and therefore the declaration and return of the 2nd Respondent as the winner of the Presidential Election’ are unlawful, unconstitutional and of no effect whatsoever.
Comments
Post a Comment