Politics
Last Fight: Anxiety as Tinubu, Atiku, Obi, APM begin battle at Supreme Court
President Bola Tinubu and his antagonists-Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, Mr Peter Obi and the Allied Peoples Movement, APM, will resume the battle for the presidency, today, at the Supreme Court as Tinubu’s aides and the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, expect favourable ruling at the apex court.
The Supreme Court communicated the hearing date through notices sent to all the parties, last Thursday.
Apart from faulting the verdict of the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, which affirmed Tinubu’s election, Atiku also filed for permission to tender a copy of Tinubu’s academic records released by the Chicago State University, CSU, USA, which he said showed that Tinubu submitted a forged CSU certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
The former vice president is also seeking to get a Washington, D.C. court to order the FBI to release documents on President Tinubu’s $460,000 forfeiture case.
We have confidence in S-Court
The PDP, yesterday, expressed optimism that its appeal will succeed at the Supreme Court.
Ologunagba said: “As the Supreme Court commences hearing on the February 25, 2023, Presidential Election Appeal, the PDP is confident that guided by the provisions of the law, the body of evidence, circumstances and facts presented before it, the apex court will deliver justice in the matter.
“The PDP believes that the issues of the February 2023, Presidential election; the bare-faced violation of rules and the laws, the brazen manipulations and falsifications in perversion of our electoral process have put our democracy in a precarious situation.
“Nigerians and indeed the whole world look forward to the Supreme Court for justice in the hope that the court will apply the laws, including the express provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), the Electoral Act, 2022 and INEC Guidelines and Regulations in delivering substantial justice in the matter.
“The earnest expectation of Nigerians and lovers of democracy across the world is that the Supreme Court will use this case to firmly validate the maxim that the Judiciary is the last hope of the common man.
Atiku, Obi engaged in another propaganda — Onanuga
Meanwhile, Mr Bayo Onanugta, Special Adviser on Information and Strategy to President Tinubu, has accused followers of Atiku and Obi of allegedly trying “to stampede the Washington, D.C. court to change its earlier order on FBI to release documents on President Tinubu’s forfeiture case of 1993.”
In a tweet on X(formerly known as Twitter) on October 21, Onanuga said: “The Obidients and Atiku Abubakar’s followers have begun another round of propaganda and campaign of falsehood over the move Friday by Atiku-Obi and David Hundeyin’s contractor Aaron Greenspan, to stampede the Washington DC court to change its earlier order on FBI to release documents on President Bola Tinubu’s forfeiture case of 1993.
“Atiku had wasted tons of dollars hiring Angela Liu to check President Tinubu’s record at Chicago State University. What he got in the main was a confirmation that President Tinubu attended the school, passed out in flying colours and did not forge any certificate. The February 2023 election losers, Peter Obi and Atiku, are now attempting to cling onto another straw, hoping for magic at the Supreme Court.
“On Thursday, Peter Obi forwarded to Greenspan, the Supreme Court notice of hearing for the appeal that will begin on Monday 23 October. We do not know the brief Obi gave Greenspan, but Greenspan rushed to the District Court in the US capital, with an emergency motion asking the court to compel the FBI to produce documents on our President immediately. The FBI had earlier agreed to produce the documents at the end of October. His motion may be heard on Monday 23 October, if all parties agree.
“To support his motion, the American made some allegations against the judiciary in Nigeria, as fed by Hundeyin, Obi and Atiku. He claimed the Supreme Court hearing date which he labelled as sudden, was intended to front-run the release of the FBI documents. To him, the FBI documents are relevant to the case in Nigeria. After reading Greenspan’s motion, one is left with the impression that the guy is very ignorant of our laws and our democracy and he is nothing but an interloper, in a matter clearly outside US jurisdiction.
“To the Obidients, the easily excitable Hundeyin and Atiku followers, I will just implore you to wait until the DC District Court decides on the matter, rather than rushing to the social media space with wild conjectures and extra-judicial trial of Nigeria’s elected President. Mr Greenspan, who is your collaborator in the latest fishing expedition is not so excitable. On his Plainsite-org, he already posted a reply by IRS that it has no FOIA records on President Tinubu’s 1993 civil case. Just like the Chicago case, this one too in DC will lead to nothing.”
Atiku, Obi, APM’s appeal
All the appellants are praying the apex court to set aside the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, which affirmed Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, as the valid winner of the February 25 presidential election.
While Atiku, through his team of 67 lawyers comprising of 18 Senior Advocates of Nigeria led by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, filed 35 grounds of appeal to challenge Tinubu’s victory, Obi, through his own team of lawyers, led by Dr. Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, filed 51 grounds of appeal before the Supreme Court.
On its part, the APM, lodged a 10-ground appeal to invalidate President Tinubu’s election.
Both Atiku, who came second in the election and Obi, who came third, are seeking to set aside the judgment of the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel of the PEPC, which had on September 6, dismissed their petitions against Tinubu.
Atiku contended that the verdict of the PEPC was not only “against the weight of evidence”, but occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice against him.
He insisted that the PEPC panel erred in law, when it failed to nullify the presidential election on the grounds of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, even when evidence showed that the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, acted in breach of extant laws and regulations guiding the conduct of elections.
Atiku accused the PEPC of reaching its unanimous decision based on gross misconstruction and misrepresentation of provisions of both the 1999 Constitution, as amended, and the Electoral Act, 2022.
He argued that section 64(4) & (5) of the Electoral Act, as well as INEC’s Regulations & Guidelines for the conduct of the election, which he tendered in evidence, made mandatory, the use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, BVAS, machines for electronic transmission of results of the election directly from the polling units to INEC’s collation system for the verification, confirmation and collation of results before announcement.
Atiku told the apex court that some of the presiding officers that personally handled the BVAS machines at polling units on the election day, had in their testimony before the PEPC, “confirmed the non-transmission of results of the presidential election electronically from the BVAS machines, whereas results of the National Assembly election that held simultaneously, were electronically transmitted without difficulty.
Atiku told the apex court that the non-compliance with the Electoral Act was nationwide, cutting across 176, 846 polling units in the country, a situation he said substantially affected the outcome of the election.
On constitutional requirement of one-quarter of the votes in two-thirds of the states and the FCT, Abuja, Atiku, argued that it was an additional and mandatory requirement to the provisions relating to the highest lawful votes and therefore a condition precedent to a declaration by INEC.
“The said FCT, Abuja, cannot be construed as the 37th state of Nigeria as done by the lower court in the light of the clear provisions of section 2(2) & section 3(1) of the 1999 Constitution. The lower court failed in its duty to interpret the material word ‘AND’ in the said sub-section.
“The provision of section 134(2) (b) of the Constitution is clear on the requirement that a presidential candidate must score at least 25% of the total votes in the FCT, Abuja.”
He prayed the Supreme Court to among other things, hold that Tinubu was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast in the election and also declare that he was not qualified to be declared the winner.
Aside from praying the court to declare him as the authentic winner of the election and order his swearing in as President, Atiku, in the alternative, urged the court to order a run-off between him and Tinubu or to nullify the entire poll and order INEC to conduct a fresh one. Cited as respondents were INEC, Tinubu and the APC.
Appeal Court erred —Peter Obi
On his own appeal, Obi argued that the PEPC panel erred in law and thereby reached a wrong conclusion when it dismissed his petition.
He alleged that the panel wrongly evaluated the proof of evidence he adduced before it and occassioned a grave miscarriage of justice when it held that he did not specify polling units where irregularities occured during the election.
Obi and the LP further faulted the PEPC for dismissing their case on the premise that they did not specify the figures of votes or scores that were allegedly suppressed or inflated in favour of President Tinubu and the APC.
They accused the Justice Tsammani-led panel of erring in law when it relied on paragraph 4(1) (d) (2) and 54 of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2022 to strike out paragraphs of the petition.
He told the apex court that the panel unjustly dismissed his allegation that INEC uploaded 18, 088 blurred results on its IReV portal.
Furthermore, Obi, alleged that the lower court ignored his allegation that certified true copies of documents that INEC issued to his legal team, comprised of 8, 123 blurred results that contained blank A4 papers, pictures and images of unknown persons, purporting same to be the CTC of polling units results of the presidential election.
“The learned justices of the court below erred in law and occasioned a miscarriage of justice when they concluded that he failed to establish the allegation of corrupt practices and over-voting,” Obi added.
He said it was wrong for the lower court to rely on the legal principle of estoppel to dismiss his contention that INEC bypassed its own regulations when it refused to electronically transmit results of the election from polling units to the IReV.
Obi insisted that the PEPC overlooked evidence that established that President Tinubu was previously indicted and fined the sum of $460,000 in the USA over his involvement in a drug-related case.
By Petrus Obi, London
London — The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship aspirant in Ebonyi State, Ifeanyi Odii, has intensified his criticism of the administration of Governor Francis Nwifuru, insisting that the people of the state deserve a different approach to governance.
Odii, who spoke with EverydayNewsngr.net in London, said what he described as the “fire brigade approach” of the Nwifuru administration was not the kind of governance Ebonyi needs.
According to him, the state requires a government with a clear vision, long-term planning and the capacity to deliver meaningful development to its people.
“The fire brigade approach of the Nwifuru government is not what the state needs,” Odii said.
He added: “I am coming to bring a new lease of life to my people.”
Odii’s comments come amid renewed political debate in Ebonyi State following the recent removal of the state Commissioner for Works. The development has attracted attention from opposition circles, with critics using it to question aspects of the administration’s handling of governance and infrastructure.
The PDP chieftain said the people of Ebonyi should expect more than what he described as reactive governance, arguing that development should be driven by a coherent programme capable of producing lasting results.
He maintained that his political ambition was motivated by a desire to provide what he described as purposeful leadership and improve the welfare of residents across the state.
“We deserve better government in Ebonyi State,” Odii said, stressing that his vision was centred on giving the people renewed confidence in government and creating opportunities for them to prosper.
As political activities ahead of the next governorship election continue to gather momentum, governance, infrastructure, accountability and the delivery of public services are expected to feature prominently in the emerging contest.
Odii’s intervention in London is likely to add further momentum to the political conversation, particularly as opposition figures seek to distinguish their vision for Ebonyi from that of the incumbent administration.
STATEMENT BY CHIEF EMMANUEL CHIDI IGWE,
SPOKESPERSON TO CHIEF DR. IFEANYI CHUKWUMA ODII
The 2027 governorship election in Ebonyi State is not a family affair, nor is it a matter to be decided by one individual or political godfather. It is a democratic contest, and Ebonyians will ultimately decide who becomes their governor through the ballot box.
No aspirant should be expected to step down simply because another politician believes he should. Every qualified candidate has the right to contest, present his programme and seek the mandate of the people.
Let me make this clear: since Senator Dave Umahi did not bring Chief Dr. Ifeanyi Chukwuma Odii into the governorship race, he cannot now claim the authority to ask him to step down. Chief Odii has his own political identity, supporters, convictions and legitimate right to seek the mandate of Ebonyians.
The decision to contest or withdraw belongs to the candidate, while the ultimate decision on who governs Ebonyi State belongs to the people.
The 2027 election should therefore be about issues, programmes, records, accountability and the future of Ebonyi—not political arrangements made by individuals behind closed doors.
Chief Dr. Ifeanyi Chukwuma Odii is prepared to place his vision and programme before Ebonyians and subject them to public scrutiny. Those seeking to retain power should equally be prepared to defend their records before the electorate.
Ebonyi 2027 is not a family arrangement. It is a contest for the confidence of the people. The people of Ebonyi State—not individuals—will have the final say.
Chief Emmanuel Chidi Igwe
Spokesperson to Chief Dr. Ifeanyi Chukwuma Odii
Politics
BREAKING: SaharaReporters Report on Arrest of Enugu Traditional Ruler, Ex-Lawmaker Is False and Misleading
The recent publication by SaharaReporters alleging that prominent Enugu traditional ruler, Igwe Obiora Igwesi, his brother and former federal lawmaker, Hon. Uchenna Sunday A. Igwesi (USA Igwesi), and eight others were arrested over an alleged attack on an NDC ward meeting in Obuoffia, Nkanu West Local Government Area, is false and deeply misleading.
The report is being described as a deliberate attempt to damage the reputation of respected leaders in Enugu State and create unnecessary political tension ahead of the 2027 elections.
Contrary to the claims contained in the publication, there was no arrest ordered by the Inspector-General of Police against Igwe Obiora Igwesi, Hon. USA Igwesi, or the other individuals named in connection with any alleged attack on an NDC meeting. There was also no operation by detectives from Zone 13 Command, Ukpo, Dunukofia, Anambra State, as alleged in the report.
Similarly, the purported petition dated September 15, 2026, and the allegations of conspiracy, unlawful possession of firearms, attempted murder, assault, threatening violence and stealing are strongly disputed and described as fabricated claims intended to create a damaging narrative around the individuals concerned.
The broader allegation that the 17 Local Government Areas of Enugu State have experienced coordinated armed attacks allegedly sponsored by Local Government Chairmen to silence the opposition is equally rejected as unfounded.
Attempts to associate Igwe Obiora Igwesi and Hon. USA Igwesi with criminal activity or political violence are viewed as an unacceptable effort to tarnish the image of individuals who have served their communities and contributed to the development of Enugu State.
The public, particularly the people of Enugu State, is therefore urged to exercise caution and verify the facts independently before accepting or circulating the allegations contained in the SaharaReporters publication.
Enugu State remains focused on peace, stability and development. Political disagreements should not be allowed to degenerate into the circulation of unverified allegations capable of inflaming tensions or damaging the reputations of individuals.
The position being maintained by the affected parties is clear: there was no arrest of the named individuals in connection with the alleged incident, no evidence has been presented establishing that any Local Government Chairman sponsored an attack, and the allegations contained in the publication are disputed in their entirety.
The public is encouraged to await verifiable facts from the appropriate authorities rather than rely on claims that have not been independently substantiated.
Fresh legal questions emerge over Chijioke Ugwu’s membership registration after Supreme Court restores party-register provisions
By Our Correspondent
Fresh legal questions have emerged over the Peoples Democratic Party’s 2027 governorship ticket in Enugu State following the Supreme Court’s restoration of key provisions of the Electoral Act dealing with political party membership registers and the conduct of primaries.
The questions centre on Chief Chijioke Peter Ugwu, who was recently announced by the PDP governorship candidate, Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji, as his running mate.
Nnaji announced Ugwu’s selection on September 24, shortly after the Supreme Court delivered its landmark judgment restoring Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026. Ugwu’s selection was subsequently reported by several Nigerian media outlets.
But documents and information available to this newspaper raise a question that could potentially become significant if the PDP ticket is challenged in court.
The PDP governorship primary in Enugu State was conducted on May 25, 2026.
However, Ugwu is understood to have registered as a PDP member on May 31, 2026 — six days after the governorship primary.
This means that if the May 31 registration date is accurately reflected in the party’s official records, his name could not have appeared in the PDP membership register submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) before the May 25 governorship primary.
That immediately raises the question:
Can a person who was not a member of the party on the date of its governorship primary subsequently be selected as the deputy governorship candidate without the Supreme Court’s restored membership-register provisions affecting the ticket?
What the Supreme Court restored
The Supreme Court, in a unanimous judgment delivered on September 24, set aside the Court of Appeal’s earlier decision which had declared the disputed provisions of the Electoral Act unconstitutional.
The apex court upheld the validity of Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2), following an appeal by INEC against the Court of Appeal judgment in the case involving the Zenith Labour Party.
Section 77(5) provides that only persons whose names are contained in a political party’s membership register submitted to INEC at least 21 days before a primary, congress or convention may participate in the exercise.
Section 77(6) requires political parties to use the membership register submitted to INEC for their primaries, congresses and conventions.
Section 77(7) deals with the consequence of failure by a party to submit its membership register within the prescribed period.
These provisions are now back in force following the Supreme Court judgment. Legal opinions suggest that the law’s insistence on the membership register submitted to INEC is relevant to the validity of the party’s eventual nomination process, depending on how the PDP formally nominated and submitted its governorship and deputy governorship candidates.
The precise documents will therefore be crucial.
Among the questions likely to arise are:
What date did the PDP submit its membership register to INEC?
Was Ugwu’s name contained in that register?
When exactly did Ugwu become a registered PDP member?
Was he a PDP member before the register was submitted to INEC?
How did the PDP formally nominate him as running mate?
Was the nomination made through a procedure recognised by the Electoral Act and the party’s constitution?
The controversy is coming at a sensitive time for the PDP, which has only recently unveiled Ugwu as Nnaji’s running mate. Ugwu, from Nguru in Nsukka Local Government Area, is an entrepreneur, philanthropist and community leader who runs businesses in logistics, contracting, consultancy and hospitality.
However, the governorship candidate and the deputy governorship candidate constitute a single electoral ticket. Therefore, any legal or constitutional issue affecting the eligibility of the deputy governorship candidate automatically has implications for the validity of the joint ticket, including the governorship candidate.
Another legal opinion available to this newspaper insists that “the gubernatorial ticket is a joint one. If the name of a deputy governor is not on the digital register, it invalidates the entire process.”
In the 2019 Bayelsa governorship election, APC’s David Lyon was declared winner. His running mate was Biobarakuma Degi-Eremienyo.
The Supreme Court later disqualified Degi-Eremienyo over the documents he submitted to INEC. The crucial point was that the Supreme Court held that his disqualification affected the joint ticket he shared with David Lyon. Consequently, the court ordered INEC to withdraw the Certificate of Return issued to Lyon and his deputy.
This happened one day before Lyon was due to be sworn in as governor. The certificate was subsequently issued to Douye Diri of the PDP, who had the next-highest lawful votes and the required geographical spread.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has announced that the collection of Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs) will commence nationwide on October 9.
The development has prompted calls for eligible voters to visit the INEC office in their respective Local Government Areas to collect their PVCs and ensure they are prepared to participate in the electoral process.
Meanwhile, supporters of Hon. Engr. Anayo Onwuegbu, Omeiheukwu Akpugoeze, have urged constituents in the Aninri/Awgu/Oji River Federal Constituency to support his bid for a second term in the Federal House of Representatives.
The supporters made the appeal while encouraging eligible residents to collect their PVCs and exercise their franchise in the forthcoming election.
Voters are advised to follow official INEC guidelines and verify the applicable collection procedures and dates before visiting their designated collection centres.
-
News3 days agoUncertainty in Anambra as Litigations Threaten Inauguration of LG Mayors, Councillors
-
News3 days agoAPC wins all chairmanship, Councillorship seats in Enugu
-
News3 days agoTinubu Seeks Fresh $1.5bn World Bank Loans
-
Opinion3 days agoThe Unsung Hero Of The Osun Election – By Felix Oboagwina
-
Crime4 days agoGunmen Kill Five Miners in Plateau State
-
News3 days agoFive Family Members Die as Water Reservoir Collapses in Enugu
-
News3 days agoAir Peace Reacts To Viral Video Of Passengers Struggling To Board Flight
-
Crime3 days agoNewlyweds Kidnapped Shortly After Engagement Ceremony