You are here: HomeNewsPolitics2023 11 06Article 707783

Politics of Monday, 6 November 2023


Prominent lawyer tells Atiku, Obi what to do after Supreme Court verdict

Peter Obi & Atiku Abubakar Peter Obi & Atiku Abubakar

Human rights lawyer, Inibehe Effiong has reacted to the Supreme Court judgement which upheld the verdict of the PEPT that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is the winner of the 2023 election.

Effiong said he hopes that the National Assembly will further amend the electoral act to clarify the position of the law, especially as regards the issue of electronic transmission of results.

He argued that by virtue of sections 60 and 65 of the Electoral Act and paragraph 38 of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) guidelines, electronic transmission is mandatory.

During an exclusive chat with, the prominent lawyer said INEC poorly conducted the last general election by not fulfilling its promises.

“INEC betrayed the trust of the Nigerian people, so I do not see the judgement as a vindication of INEC, I rather see it as an indictment on INEC because even the justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Okoro stated in his judgement that the non-transmission of results affected the credibility of the electoral process”

Effiong said what Prof Yakub Mahmood did in the last election was very shameless, for announcing that electronic transmission was going to be adhered to and public funds were provided for it and at the end of the day he did not deliver on that promise.

He said the INEC Chairman should resign as he has no reason to remain in office. Speaking to Atiku Abubakar of the PDP and Peter Obi of the Labour Party, Effiong said both men need to start the work of the opposition by checkmating the administration of President Tinubu.

“Now begin the work of the opposition, which is basically to checkmate terrible government, a terrible Presidency and hold him accountable. And then ensure that they play their role in nation-building.”

Effiong said he agreed with the Supreme Court for rejecting Atiku’s fresh evidence against Tinubu because the time for determination of a petition is 180 days and that should necessarily apply to presidential petitions.

He noted that the Supreme Court did not pronounce on the merits of the allegation of forgery against Tinubu.

“So the controversy still remains, even though on technical grounds, the fresh evidence presented by Atiku was rejected for reasons that the Supreme Court had explained.”