INEC can’t explain Tinubu’s victory, claims Obi…

The Labour Party (LP) and its candidate, Peter Obi, has told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) how the Independent National Electoral  Commission (INEC), deliberately subverted the will of Nigerians by dishonestly manipulating the February 25 presidential election in favour of President Bola Tinubu and his All Progressives Congress (APC).

The petitioners in their final written address argued that the Commission has been unable to provide evidence in court and prove ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ how it came to the conclusion that APC and Tinubu won.

It, therefore, urged the court not to close its eyes to constitutional violations that characterised the disputed election but to act in the interest of justice by declaring the purported return of Tinubu and APC as winners invalid and a nullity.

In their joint final address filed on July 23, the petitioners accused INEC of failing to comply with the requirement of the law by refusing to provide them with certified copies of the ‘top copies (Electoral operations’ copies’) of the Forms EC8A in the polling unit under paragraph 39 of the regulations and guidelines.

Obi equally urged the court to hold that going by the unchallenged evidence he presented that he won in 13 States including Rivers, Benue and the FCT, he was winner of the election.

While insisting that the election was manipulated in favour of President Tinubu, the petitioners submitted that INEC mischievously downloaded 18,088 blurred polling units results comprising blank A4 papers and photographs of unknown persons in place of the presidential results, which were duly certified by the Commission and handed over to them.

The said blurred copies of the polling unit results were obtained from 168 local government areas in 14 states of the federation including Adamawa; Ogun, Ekiti; Rivers; Akwa Ibom; Niger; Edo; Bauchi; Bayelsa; Gombe; Kaduna; Benue; Cross Rivers and Lagos respectively.

Obi further told the court to hold that the non-compliance with the relevant laws by INEC during the conduct of the election not only substantially, but grieviously affected the result of the election.