Presidential Election Tribunal: Atiku/Buhari’s lawyers are incompetent
February 27th, 2008 | Published in Blogosphere, Governance
The Appeal court decided the opposition has no case against Yar’Adua based on the evidence presented before it. What the court did not say is that the presidential election was free of flaws. The court can not make the call as a neutral arbiter; but it can make that determination if necessary and amble evidence were presented before it.
I read Adeola’s declaration that the “judgment of the court was simply absolute nonsense.†No, it’s not!
What is nonsense was the manner the plaintiff attorneys went about the case. They were grossly tacky and incompetent!
The VOA website has the Lead Judge Abdulkadir Jega on tape giving his verdict. The judge told the packed court that the “petitioners failed to substantiate their allegations.†(Listen to audio via AfricanLoft), excerpt below:
“This petition has been plagued by want of evidence in proof of virtually all the allegations contained therein,” he said. “Even if I were to accept all the excluded evidence provided by the petitioner, which evidence relates to only four states of the federation, the petitioner would still have been unable to establish his petition. Accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed.”
Nigeria has 36 states, plus the federal Capital Territory, so if Atiku/Buhari lawyers limited their case to just four states, how on earth can the elections be overturned?
