Why we didn't declare Atiku winner — INEC

President-Elect, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (left) and PDP Presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar.

....Denies diverting votes for Tinubu

THE Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, yesterday, gave reasons it did not declare the candidate of opposition Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Atiku Abubakar, as the winner of the presidential election that held on February 25.

The electoral body, in processes it filed before the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, sitting in Abuja, maintained that Atiku failed to score at least one-quarter of the votes cast in at least two-thirds of the 36 states of the federation and, as such, was not declared winner. 

It, therefore, prayed the court to strike out the petition that Atiku and his party, PDP, filed to challenge the declaration of Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, as winner of the presidential contest.

INEC, in the preliminary objection it filed through its team of lawyers led by Mr. A. B. Mahmoud, SAN, described Atiku's petition as grossly incompetent, saying it was an abuse of the court process. 

It termed the petition as "vague and academic", insisting that it was anchored on "non existent, imprecise. and unclear averments".

INEC told the court that though Atiku alleged that the presidential election was rigged in Tinubu's favour, he, however, failed to give specifics about how the said manipulation took place. 

For instance, the electoral body noted that whereas Atiku, in the petition he jointly filed with the PDP, alleged that its presiding officers failed to properly fill and countersign alterations in some of the election forms in over 40, 000 polling units, he did not provide details of the purportedly affected polling units to enable the Respondents to adequately respond to the allegation.

"In paragraph 143 of the Petition, the Petitioners further alleged that the 1st Respondent and its agents wrongly and deliberately entered wrong scores/results in twenty-two States.

"No detail, facts or pleadings were specifically provided on the purported wrong scores/results in the particular polling units or wards in those 22 states to enable the 1st Respondent to adequately respond to these allegations," INEC added. 

Besides, it told the court that necessary parties or persons who are likely to be affected by allegations that were raised by Atiku, were not made parties to the petition.

Insisting that petitioners are seeking "un-grantable reliefs", the electoral body noted that though Atiku and PDP are contending that the entire results of the Presidential Election as declared, inclusive of their own results are wrong, they failed to provide which results they perceived to be the correct results in the election and "yet, they sought to be declared winners of the Presidential Election held on the 25th day of February".

"The Petitioners in paragraph 126 of the Petition stated that there were manifest cases of over-voting in polling units in various States but did not provide the polling units where the alleged over-voting occurred to enable the 1st Respondent adequately respond to these assertions.

"In paragraph 140 of the Petition, the Petitioners alleged over-voting in the 23 Local Government Areas in Rivers State without specifically stating or providing the details of the over-voting and the particulars of the polling units allegedly affected in the State to enable the 1st Respondent adequately respond to these assertions.

"The Petitioners alleged that in the results from 19,702 polling units across the 36 states and the FCT, there were various forms of infractions, without specifically stating the particular polling units results and the nature of the purported infractions.

"The Petitioners alleged that 4, 307 polling units did not have stamp on their respective Form EC8A, without specifically stating the particular polling units allegedly affected.

"In paragraph 118 of the Petition, the Petitioners vaguely alleged that 9,463 polling units across 30 States show that votes returned were in excess of accredited voters. The details of these polling units and the specific details of the alleged over-voting were not stated in the body of the petition."

Culled from Vanguard