Nigeria's Supreme Court Confirms The Election Of President Tinubu

On Thursday, October 26, the Supreme Court rejected the pleas of opposition candidates Peter Obi of the Labour Party and Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and upheld President Bola Tinubu's victory in the presidential election held on February 25.

Opposition party complaints, which included allegations of fraud and INEC infractions as well as questions over Tinubu's eligibility, were denied by the Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja in September. 

The opposition appeals, which claimed Tinubu was ineligible to run for president, had irregularities in election law, and were based on fraud, but the panel of seven judges determined that they lacked validity. 

All grounds of appeal, including those concerning qualification, adherence to the Electoral Act, vote percentage in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), and accusations of electoral misconduct, were categorically denied by the court.

"On the whole, having resolved all the issues against the appellant, it is my view that there is no merit in the appeal and it is hereby dismissed," Justice Inyang Okoro reportedly said in dismissing Atiku's appeal, according to Channels Television. 

He upheld the court's ruling that Tinubu is Nigeria's legitimately elected president. "This affirms the judgement of the lower court, rendered on September 6, 2023, which upheld the election of the second respondent as the legitimate President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria." 

 Obi's appeal, which centred on Tinubu's purported duplicate nomination of Vice President Kashim Shettima, was also denied by the court. The court ruled that its decision from May 26 had already addressed this matter.

 Regarding problem Number 4, which deals with the double nomination and was not included in Atiku's appeal, this court believes that since it has already addressed the case, it cannot permit it to be re-litigated in this same court. 

The litigation must come to an end. We are not going to sit down right now and discuss when this man resigned or did not quit when they held new primaries to replace him, as we have done in the past. This should not have been brought in. This court rendered its decision while the case was still pending in the trial court. 

The lower court's judgement states that the subject has been settled by the Supreme Court, and that should have been the end of it. 

It is not proper that you are bringing up the double nomination problem now so we can consider it and make another ruling. This appeal is rejected because it is without merit.