The presidential election petition tribunal has dismissed an
application filed by the Labour Party (LP) seeking to question the Independent
National Electoral Commission (INEC) on the technology deployed for the conduct
of the election.
According to NAN, the five-member panel led by Haruna
Tsammani, held on Saturday, that the tribunal lacked the jurisdiction to grant
the request because it was brought outside the pre-hearing session.
The application, tagged CA/PEPC/03/2023, was filed by the LP
and Peter Obi, the party’s presidential candidate.
The applicants, among other reasons for disputing the
outcome of the election, are accusing INEC of non-compliance with the 2022 electoral
act.
The petitioners’ concerns also included the failure to
transmit the results of the presidential election in real-time on the INEC
results viewing portal (IREV) as assured.
The petitioners had asked the court to permit them to question
INEC on the technology deployed to conduct the election including the
competency of the ICT experts who oversaw technology.
In two applications, the petitioners through Patrick Ikweto,
their counsel, prayed the court to order INEC to supply the names and other
details of its ICT professionals that deployed electronic devices for the
conduct of the election.
Specifically, the petitioners maintained that given INEC’s
reply to their petition, the commission should be compelled to answer 12
questions posed to it.
At the hearing, the tribunal in a unanimous decision, ruled
that the applicants failed to disclose any extreme circumstance that stopped
them from filing within the statutory time.
The court said motions could not be heard at the hearing
session.
“It is an afterthought on the grounds that the pre-hearing
period to file such an application elapsed on May 22,” Tsammani said.
“I have not disputed
the fact that they did not call the attention of the court during the
pre-hearing session.
“It is for the applicant to take a step towards the hearing
of his motion on notice. The court cannot do that for him.
“The petitioners’ counsel are very conversant with the
provisions of the law and did not ask for an extension of time.
“They rather seek to employ the right to fair hearing as a
magic wand to escape the consequence of their failure to comply with the law
and blame the court for its inaction.
“Their application is incompetent and the court lacks the
jurisdiction to entertain it and accordingly, the application is struck out.”
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com