It is not a question of if Section 134 (2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria as amended “is tested in court”. It is all about interpreting the simple provision of the constitution in the court of law to right the wrong visited on the Nigerian voters by INEC.
In Gani Fawehinmi’s case the Supreme Court held that every citizen of Nigeria has locus stand to approach a court of law for purpose of interpreting the provision of the constitution.
Going to court to interpret a provision of the constitution is not a pre-election or post-election matter. As such all the citizens of Nigeria aggrieved with the election outcome especially a violation of the constitution are free to go to court to seek redress.
Some legal minds have cited some Supreme court and Court of Appeal decisions which held that FCT, Abuja is a state. Nobody is quarrelling with this decision. It is true that Abuja is the 37th state or one of the 37 states of Nigeria.
But even if Tinubu of APC wins 25 percent of votes cast in 36 states of Nigeria, Section 134 (2) (b) specifically provided that winning Abuja State is a condition precedent for him to be declared President-elect at the first ballot.
Interestingly, the INEC’s tally was based on 2/3 of 36 States which is 24 states. The extra 6 states tallied for the so-called election winner as having won 25 percent spread vote does not legally count in the eyes of the law.
Why did INEC not tally the vote based on figure 37 states. INEC has no power to exclude FCT, Abuja as a must 25 percent win!
Section 134(2)(b) is clear and simple. FCT, Abuja even as a State is a must 25 percent win, otherwise the declaration of Tinubu as President-elect of Nigeria is null and void ab initio. Read more.
Barr. Dr. Jezie Ekejiuba
President, Voters Rights Association of Nigeria (VRAN)