The hearing of the case by the Allied Peoples Movement has been continued to Friday, May 9, 2023, by the Presidential Election case Court.
The petitioners asked for additional time to decide how to proceed with their case, and the Court granted their request.
The All Progressives Congress Bola Tinubu and Kashim Shettima were elected as president and vice president, respectively, in the APM contesting election.
They argue that Tinubu was unable to run for president since the APC did not legitimately sponsor him because he lacked a properly selected vice president.
The Independent National Electoral Commission, the APC, Bola Tinubu, Kashim Shettima, and Kabir Masari are listed as the petition’s first through fifth respondents.
The third respondent “lost his candidature and was no longer eligible to run in the presidential election,” according to the party, when the fifth respondent withdrew his nomination as the vice presidential candidate in the previous presidential election for the second respondent.
According to Eyewitness9ja, the PEPC on Tuesday, May 30, postponed the APM’s appeal until Friday, June 2, 2023, in response to a comment made by Wole Olanikpekun, a lawyer representing the president.
Olanikpekun informed the Court that the Supreme Court recently rendered a decision that, in his opinion, appeared to have addressed the matter the APM had placed before the Court.
He cited the Supreme Court’s ruling from last Friday, May 26, which rejected the Peoples Democratic Party’s request for the Court to invalidate the presidential and vice presidential candidates’ slates due to double nominating them.
Olanipekun wanted to know if the APM’s lawsuit, which is also contesting the election results on the basis that Shettima was replaced with Kabir Masari, will be unaffected by the Apex Court’s ruling.
“We are aware that the Supreme Court decided on this same issue in the yet-to-be-reported judgement SC/CV/501/20223, in which the Peoples Democratic Party was pitted against INEC and three other parties, and the apex court arbitrated all of the issues,” he added.
“We pledge that the certified authentic copies of the Supreme Court’s ruling will be made accessible within the following two days.
And we’ll also talk to the petitioners about whether filing this petition will still be necessary in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Shehu Abubakar, the APM’s attorney, responded by asking for a little period of time so that the petitioners may use the ruling to guide their choice.
According to the learned silk’s reply, he stated, “We shall be seeking to defer the hearing of this petition so that we may apply to the Supreme Court for a copy of the relevant ruling, so that we may review it and understand how it affects this petition.
His motion was granted, and the hearing for APM was postponed until June 2.
The third and fourth respondents’ attorney, Lateef Fagbemi, notified the Court after the hearing’s resumption on Friday that they had not yet received the aforementioned ruling.
The APM’s attorney similarly informed the Court that they are unable to “take a position on the status of the petition” until they get access to a copy of the Supreme Court’s decision.
“May we respectfully request an adjournment so that we can express our opinion regarding the petition’s status.”
Following the consent of all respondents, the Court’s five-person panel approved their motion.
Last Friday, the Supreme Court rejected the Peoples Democratic Party’s plea asking for Bola Tinubu to be disqualified from the February 25 presidential election due to the alleged double nomination of his Vice President, Kashim Shettima.
Thus, the Supreme Court upheld that the All Progressives Congress pair was qualified to run in the February 25 presidential election.