‘It Is As Fixed As Anything’ – Clarke Reveals Why Atiku, Peter Obi Will Likely Fail At The Supreme Court

Spread the love

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Robert Clarke has submitted that the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, and his Labour Party (LP) counterpart, Peter Obi will likely come back empty-handed from the Supreme Court in their attempt to upturn the tribunal’s ruling on the outcome of the 2023 presidential election.

Speaking on Sunday, the senior lawyer observed that the unanimous tribunal judgment which affirmed the victory of President Bola Tinubu is as fixed as anything.

According to him, the tribunal’s judgment was detailed and thorough and the Supreme Court had already ruled on almost all the issues raised by the petitioners.

Bellnews recalls the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), had on Wednesday, September 6, unanimously dismissed the suits by Obi and Atiku and affirmed the electoral victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidates, Bola Tinubu and Kashim Shettima, in the February 25, 2023, presidential poll.

However, both Obi and Atiku in separate reactions rejected the verdict of the tribunal and vowed to challenge it at the Supreme Court.

But speaking on the move, Clarke during his appearance on Channels TV was of the opinion that the matter does not need to go to the apex court.

He said: “From my experience from the bar, I believe that the unanimous judgment of the tribunal is unassailable. It is as fixed as you can fix anything.”

“I assure you if there’s an appeal, I doubt whether anything can come out of the appeal.

“I doubt if the Supreme Court can upturn the judgment of the tribunal.

“I make this submission because almost all the issues raised before the tribunal had been adjudicated upon by the apex court.”

He said all the matters based on law had already been by the Supreme Court and therefore, there was no need for appeal.

The lawyer added that in Atiku’s case, point of facts were canvassed and according to the law, when you canvass points of facts, you must provide the particulars upon which you want the court to make a pronouncement.

Clarke noted that the tribunal dismissed Atiku’s case because his lawyers didn’t provide any material of facts before it.

“Atiku failed to raise issues on point of law. How could he get a judgement in his favour” he queried.

On the petition by Peter Obi and LP, Clarke pointed out that almost all issues raised by them including the status of Abuja had been ruled upon by the Supreme Court in previous times, hence the Appeal Court is not expected to go against a Supreme Court ruling.

In his words, “Almost all the four items that the Labour Party asked for were decisions that had been and heard upheld by the apex court.

“So, what are you asking the tribunal to do? To sit on an appeal against the judgment of the Supreme Court?

Spread the love

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *