KIVOrg

Today I remember one of my intellectual influences in the university days especially in University of Calabar. I will have a valid assessment across planets if I dub him "an intellectual iroko". He was more!  There was this lecturer who had 13 academic degrees. Among them are 6 PhD's, many Masters.l degrees and many Bachelors. I am not talking about his Diplomas. He was one of the reasons I chose to accept studying Philosophy. His story was first mentioned to me by my then guardian and brother Barr. Bethel Nnaemeka Nwaogwugwu.  This particular man I am about writing of went as much as having double doctorate in law. That is, he bagged 2 PhD's in law alone. He also had a PhD in Philosophy, PhD in Religious Studies, PhD in Sociology and DD (Doctor of Divinity). He also read the 4 languages with which the Bible was written and could correct the translations of the Bible using the meaning of the original language and the contextual situation. This is to state that he was

Politicians and pundits have crowded our socio-political sphere with pontifications, explications and definitions of this section of the Nigerian constitution. It is obvious that intentions and interests will play serious and diverse roles in the advancement of meanings to the explicandum hence the media has been awash with platoons of explanations. From this beginning, it will be very important to make it abundantly clear that the profession that have the right of authority to clearly explain the concerns of this section of the Nigerian constitution is logic. It simply means that only logicians are necessarily and sufficiently in the position to lay this issue to rest. It is for this reason that I take the pride of place to explain this particular section of the constitution so as to help Nigeria and Nigerians resolve the issues surrounding the February 25th, 2023 Presidential Election. Beyond enlightening our compatriots on this matter, it will be a resource to the Presidential Elect

PART TEN! PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA Peter Obi’s petition paragraphs 15, 16, 17 & 18 reads: APC is a registered political party under the laws of the FRN which purportedly sponsored Tinubu and therefore participated in the election. 16. LP & Obi are parties interested in the petition. 17. At the conclusion of the scheduled election, the collation of results lasted until the 1st of March 2023 when INEC announced the result and declared the scores of the candidates in the following as contained in Form EC8E (pic 1). 18. Based on INEC’s declaration, the summary of the result disclosed the following (pic 2). From the result, which is being challenged in the petition, INEC declared and returned Tinubu as the presidential election winner and thereafter, issued certificates of return to him and Shettima. INEC’s response: We state that APC is a political party registered under the laws of the FRN which duly sponsored Tinubu and Shettima. We admit

PART NINE! PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA PETER OBI’S PETITION PARAGRAPH 13 & 14 READS: Bola Ahmed Tinubu, although not duly sponsored and not qualified, contested along with Peter Obi and others for the office of the President of the FRN. Tinubu was returned by INEC as the winner of the election. 14. Kashim Shettima, although not duly sponsored and thus not qualified, was nominated by Tinubu and APC as the VP candidate of Tinubu and consequently contested on a joint ticket with him and was returned in the election hereby challenged as VP of the FRN. INEC’s RESPONSE: We deny that Tinubu was not duly sponsored and not qualified to contest the election as alleged in paragraph 13. Tinubu was duly returned as the winner of the presidential election. We admit paragraph 14 of the petition only to the extent that Kashim Shettima contested on a joint ticket with Tinubu and was returned as a winner along with him. Shettima was duly nominated and sponsored

PART EIGHT! PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA Peter Obi’s Petition paragraphs 11 & 12 reads: INEC is vested with powers and functions assigned by the constitution and the Electoral Act of 2022, which includes the organization and conduct of prescribed elections in the territory known as the FRN including the office of the President. It was in that capacity that they organized and conducted the election for the office of the President of the FRN, the subject matter of this petition. 12. In the discharge of its duties in the conduct of the election, INEC did so through its regular ad-hoc staff who functioned at the designated venues and stages of the election. INEC’s response: We admit paragraphs 11 and 12 and state in addition that the election was successfully conducted in accordance with the requirements of the constitution of the FRN. APC’s response: Admits paragraphs 11 and 12 with no additional comments. Tinubu & Shettima’s reply admits para

PART SEVEN! PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA PETER OBI'S PETITION PARAGRAPH 10 READS: LP & Peter Obi, in accordance with the prevailing law, have the right to lodge this petition to the court constitutionally vested with the jurisdiction to receive and entertain election petitions in challenge to the proceedings at and at the outcome of the election to the office of the President of the FRN. INEC’s RESPONSE: We admit paragraph 10 of the petition. APC’s RESPONSE: We repeat and adopt paragraphs 3-7 hereof, and state that Peter Obi not being a member of LP does not possess the right to contest the presidential election held on 25th of February 2023, and thus not entitled to lodge this petition to challenge the outcome of the election. TINUBU & SHETTIMA’S RESPONSE: Contrary to paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 10, amongst other paragraphs of the petition alluding to the petitioners’ right to present this petition anchored on Peter Obi’s membership of LP

PART SIX! PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA PETER OBI’S PETITION PARAGRAPH 9 READS: In appropriate cases, the Agents raised complaints about anomalies where they occurred and reported such complaints to designated officers of the LP and INEC. INEC’s RESPONSE: We deny that any complaints about anomalies were reported to our officers as alleged in P. 9 of the petition and put the petitioners to the strictest proof. APC’s RESPONSE: We deny paragraph 9 and therefore, put the petitioners to the strictest proof of the assertion contained in the said paragraph. TINUBU & SHETTIMA’S RESPONSE: In response to the generalized statement in paragraph 9 of the petition, LP agents did not report and could not have honestly reported any incidence of anomalies to INEC as the election was held in substantial compliance with the principles of the Electoral Act.

PART FIVE!  PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA Petition paragraph 8 reads: The Agents performed their assigned and statutorily designated roles at the election. These roles included observing and monitoring the process of arrival of election materials where they were supplied by INEC and leading to and including the process of accreditation, voting, counting of votes, and announcement of results of the election. These agents where the election proceeded in due form, upon INEC’s agents duly entering the results in the result sheets at the Polling Units, signed and collected duplicate copies of the result sheets. INEC’s response to 8: LP did not have Polling Agents in all the Polling Units across Nigeria as they only submitted a list of 134,874 Polling Agents which is 41,972 short of the 176,846 polling units across Nigeria. INEC denies that LP polling agents were present at all Polling units across Nigeria. APC’s response: We deny paragraph 8 because LP d

PART FOUR (SIMPLIFIED)  PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA Obi’s petition paragraph 7 reads: LP is a body corporate with perpetual succession and in the sponsorship of Peter Obi and the conduct of the election thereof, acting through its members duly appointed as agents at all stages of the election, namely, at the Polling Units, the Ward Collation Centers, the LG Collation Centers, the State Collation Centers and at the ultimate collation center at the Federal Level in Abuja. INEC’s response: All political parties intending to sponsor candidates in the election were required to submit lists of their agents to INEC. The guidelines issued by INEC require all political parties to submit the list of their agents between the 21st of December 2022 and the 20th of January 2023 via an online portal. Some of the political party agents whose names were on the list submitted to INEC were absent at their polling units while some others who were present neglected to

PART THREE!  PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA OBI'S PETITION PARAGRAPH 6 READS: LP is a duly registered political party under the law of FRN and was the political party that sponsored Obi as its candidate to contest the election. INEC’S RESPONSE: Admitted with no additional comments. APC’S RESPONSE: We admit paragraph 6 only to the extent that LP is a duly registered political party under the laws of the FRN but deny that LP validly sponsored Obi as the candidate to contest the election. TINUBU & SHETTIMA’S RESPONSE: we are stating that LP has never recorded success in any previous election in Nigeria on a national or significant scale. They only won 6 out of 100 senatorial seats and less than 10% of the 360 seats in the House of Representatives.

PART TWO!  PETER OBI & LP VS INEC, APC, BOLA TINUBU & KASHIM SHETTIMA OBI’S PETITION PARAGRAPH 4 READS: Peter Obi’s petition was duly sponsored by Labour Party’s petition on whose platform Peter Obi contested the election. LP & Obi shall at trial rely on Peter Obi’s nomination documents filed with INEC. INEC’S RESPONSE: We deny paragraph 4 because we put the petitioners to the strictest proof. APC’S RESPONSE: We vehemently deny paragraph 4 of the petition and state that Peter Obi was not duly and validly nominated or sponsored by LP and as such could not have been sponsored by LP to contest the election into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. TINUBU & SHETTIMA’S RESPONSE: We deny paragraph 4 because Tinubu has always been a most consistent politician who has not shifted political tendency and alignment whereas, Peter Obi has consistently crisscrossed different political parties. OBI’S PETITION PARAGRAPH 5 READS: Peter Obi was a candidate at

PART ONE!  On March 23rd, 2023, Peter Obi and Labour Party filed a petition at the Court of Appeal against APC, INEC, Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Shettima Kashim.  Let’s review what Peter Obi sued for and how the other parties responded. There are 102 paragraphs in the petition which the parties had to respond to one by one.  — In APC’s reply (pg 9) they denied ALL paragraphs except 1, 2, 6, 11, 17, 18, and 19 of the petition.  — Tinubu & Shettima’s response (pg 19), they denied ALL paragraphs and reliefs in the petition except 11, 12, 17 and 19 of the petition. — In INEC’s response (pg 6) they denied ALL paragraphs except 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of the petition. Note: For the sake of knowledge sharing, I will publish all paragraphs day by day with each party’s response so we can learn which arguments are likely to be pushed at the tribunal hearing.  Shall we? Credit of the piece largely to @General_Oluchi