Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), has predicted that Atiku Abubakar, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate in the February 23 election, will face “insurmountable legal obstacles” at the Presidential Election Petition’s Tribunal.
Falana in a
statement on Tuesday, however, warned that Atiku should not be
blackmailed not to take the legal step, adding that the calls prevailing
on him not to approach the tribunal were uncalled for.
He
recalled that President Muhammadu Buhari who was declared the winner of
the February 23 election, had challenged his losses in court in the
successive presidential elections of 2003, 2007 and 2011.
Falana,
however, stated that the failure of successive administrations to
reform the electoral process, had created insurmountable legal obstacles
for election petitioners.
“The campaign that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar should not seek redress is totally uncalled for.
“Aggrieved
by the general elections of 2003, 2007 and 2011 conducted by INEC,
Candidate Muhammadu Buhari sought redress in court.
“The chairman of the APC, Adams Oshiomole and other APC leaders have had cause to claim their mandate through the court.
“Even
some APC members who lost the just-concluded National Assembly
elections have announced plans to challenge the return of their
opponents by INEC.
“Therefore, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar should not
be blackmailed or begged by any group of people not to challenge the
presidential election held in the country on February 23, 2019.
“Regrettably,
however, the failure of the PDP and APC-led Federal Government to
reform the electoral process has created insurmountable legal obstacles
for election petitioners,” he said.
Falana added that “the
frustration of election petitioners has been compounded by several
judicial authorities”, with some decisions holding that “an election
cannot be questioned on grounds of corrupt practices.
“For
instance, a petitioner is required to prove that there is substantial
non-compliance and that the non-compliance has substantially affected
the results of the election.
“In Yussuf v Obasanjo, it was held that an election cannot be questioned on grounds of corrupt practices.
“In Falae v Obasanjo it was held that it has to be proved that financial inducement was authorised by the winner of an election.
“In Buhari v Obasanjo it was held that the onus of proving electoral malpractice rests on the petitioner.
“Several fraudulent elections have been upheld under the doctrine of substantial compliance.
“In
several cases, winners of fraudulent elections that were annulled were
allowed to take part in rerun elections ordered by the courts.”
Source:- Dailypostng
Share your thoughts