By YOU CAN’T INSPECT INEC’S SERVER, TRIBUNAL TELLS ATIKU
BlackBox Nigeria reports that the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal moments ago had dismissed the application filed by Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, seeking to inspect INEC server allegedly used in collating results for the Feb. 23 general election.
BkackBox Nigeria gathered from a report by the News Agency of Nigeria, NAN that Justice Mohammed Garba, Chairman of the panel, held that granting such application at this interlocutory stage would preempt the substantive petition.
Garba explained that the court was yet to keep abreast of testimonies of witnesses and documentary evidence from all parties in the matter, adding that granting the request at this stage would pre-empt the proceedings.
The report also had it that Dr Levi Uzoukwu SAN, Counsel for the petitioners/applicants, in an interlocutory application, urged the tribunal to grant his clients access to inspect the server used for the general election.
Uzoukwu had submitted that the application relied on Section 151 of the Electoral Act which mandated the electoral body to allow candidates who contested in an election organised by it to inspect the electoral materials.
Meanwhile, the application was objected to by Mr Yunus Usman SAN, Counsel for INEC, as according to him, the electoral body did not use or maintain server in the Feb. 23 general election.
Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, Counsel for President Muhammadu Buhari, Mr Lateef Fagbemi SAN, Counsel for All Progressive Congress (APC), also raised objections against granting the application.
Chief Chris Uche SAN, co-counsel for the applicants (Atiku and PDP), while speaking with newsmen after the session, said the decision of the tribunal would be challenged at the Supreme Court.
Uche said his clients had relied on Section 151 of the Electoral Act to file the application, adding that the provision mandated INEC to allow candidates access to its materials for inspection whenever the need arose.
However, the chairman of the panel adjourned the matter until June 26 for continuation of hearing.
