THE NEWS NIGERIA
Chief Robert Clarke , a Senior Advocate of Nigeria speaks on the verdict given by the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), dismissing the cases of the petitioners against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC). But, the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, and his Labour Party (LP) counterpart, Peter Obi, have shouted blue murder, insisting that they appeal to the Supreme Court. However, Clarke advises the petitioners to reconsider the idea of dragging the matter further.
What’s your view of the trial court of the PEPC in the last judgment favoring the incumbent president?
My personal view and I believe that this view has been enriched with my experience in the dispensation of justice at the bar. I have every belief and I seriously believe that the unanimous judgment of the Court of Appeal is unassailable. It is as fixed as you can fix anything and I can assure you that, if there is an appeal, I doubt if there is anything that can come out of the appeal.
This assertion is too categorical and too preemptive of the Supreme Court. Why did you say so?
Well, let us be clear to ourselves. All the matters based on law that were brought before the tribunal had already been adjured by the apex court in this country. Therefore, if I were to say my personal reasons for my earlier statement, there was no need for the tribunal to have gone through all of that.
Take for instance, in Atiku’s case, no real point of law was canvassed, but points of facts. And in tribunal matters, when you bother with a point of fact, the law says you must provide the particular facts upon which you want the court to judge the case. As the tribunal rightly said, Atiku’s counsel for one reason or the other never presented any fact before the court that could make the court look into those facts and be able to say categorically one way or the other whether there merits in those facts or not. Therefore, any reasonable lawyer, apologies for my word, would not have taken the matter considering the available facts before it and asked the tribunal to adjudge on the matter.
Secondly, the Labour Party was pressing their case on what the law says and it does not say. At least, all the materials the Labour Party presented before the tribunal were decisions that had been held and upheld at the apex court. So, what are you asking the tribunal to do? Do you want the judges to sit on an appeal against the judgment of the Supreme Court.? Whether Abuja can be granted a special status against the judgment of the Supreme Court, this matter had already been decided. Now, asking the tribunal to create a special status where you must make 25 percent or else you die if you don’t win an election?
