Presidential Election Petition: Details of what transpired at Tribunal today, July 5

Below are some details of what transpired at the Presidential Election Petition Court on Friday, June 23, 2023, as documented by “General” Oluchi via Twitter.

And it goes like this…

Tinubu & Shettima’s lawyers will soon open their case today. If they plan to call witnesses, they will all testify that Tinubu DID NOT win the election and shouldn’t have been on the ballot to begin with. You will see.

The judges arrived at 9:23 am and began taking attendance of lawyers for each party. After that, Tinubu’s lead counsel Olanipekun SAN is expected to announce their activities for the day.

After the letter was accepted by the judges, Olanipekun moved on to Item 3 on his list. He said he would like to tender 12 documents concerning Tinubu’s academic background from Chicago State University, signed by Jamal T. Orr. Again, Dr. Uzoukwu objected to the admissibility of the documents while the other respondents didn’t object to it.

After the judges accepted the 12 documents, Olanipekun moved on to items 4 and 5 on his list. He said he would like to tender a copy of Tinubu’s Nigerian passport data page issued on November 2019.

Wole Olanipekun SAN (Tinubu & Shettima) informed the court that they are ready to proceed but would like to tender some documents from the bar and have served the respective parties. He said he will tender 18 documents in total today before calling the witness. The first document he tendered was a letter from the Nigerian Police to the US Embassy dated February 4, 2003, asking them to verify Tinubu’s criminal background in the US.

Dr. Livy Uzoukwu (LP) “vehemently opposed” the documents and will give reasons at the final address. “We do not consent,” he said. The other respondents did not object to the admissibility of the documents.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0QsKYiX0AEEl1N?format=jpg&name=large

As a side note, this letter did not ask if Tinubu forfeited money or was charged to court. Balogun asked questions that weren’t applicable to Tinubu’s case and therefore got irrelevant answers. Read it carefully

Samuel Ugoh, @eaglesamc, notes:

This document made no sense at all, the question asked was totally different from what it should be.. Arrest is very different from forfeiture. Technicality is what these people are looking at.

After the court accepted the passport data page as evidence, Olanipekun announced that he would like to tender a copy of Tinubu’s US visa page issued on February 2011, July 12th, 2017, July, 25th, 2019, and November 18th, 2021. Again, Dr. Livy Uzoukwu objected while the other respondents did not object to the admissibility of the documents.

Jeremy Whyte, @loveshare73, reacts:

A life built on forgery and lies is a sad tapestry, woven with the threads of deception and destined to collapse under the weight of his deceit. Tinubu can never be respectfully accepted as the president. He did not win the election; inec is unable to show us.

The court accepted the documents, and Olanipekun also tendered a Certified true Copt of the Report of the Committee of the Location of the Federal Capital of Nigeria. The petitioners objected while the respondents did not object. The document was also accepted by the court.

Olanipekun also tendered Certified True Copies of form EC8D for Kano state and EC8DA for the 2023 Presidential election. The petitioners and the respondents did not object. The judges accepted the documents.

Olanipekun corrected that the copy of Tinubu’s candidacy previously tendered is dated July 6th, 2022, and not 6th July 2023. He also tendered a copy of an Acknowledgment Notice for Shettima’s Voluntary Withdrawal of Candidacy from Borno Central Senatorial District. There were no objections.

After the previous documents were accepted, Olanipekun tendered the Supreme Court Judgment between PDP & INEC challenging Shettima’s double nomination, which was delivered on May 26th, 2023. There were no objections. The document was accepted.

Side note: the judgment between PDP & INEC was because PDP filed this case before the ELECTION. This is completely different from Peter Obi’s case, which was filed after the election. You can read the full judgment online.

The next document Olanipekun tendered was a copy of Nigerian Tribune Newspaper page 27, published on February 24th, 2023, and page 28 of the same newspaper published on February 23rd, 2023. The petitioners objected but the respondents did not object. The court accepted the documents.

Tinubu’s lawyer announced that they would like to call their witness Senator Michael Opeyemi Bamidele. The witness identified as a Christian and would like to swear with the holy bible. After swearing an oath, the cross-examination began.

The witness, Opeyemi Bamidele stated that he’s a legislator and a lawyer. He got his BA at the University of Ife; LLB at Uniben; LLM at the University of New Hampshire, and a BL from the Nigerian law School. He said he is also a licensed Attorney at Law in the NY Bar since 1999. He provided his resume to Olanipekun and confirmed that he signed his own resume. The resume was tendered as evidence and there were no objections.

The lawyer asked Bamidele about Paragraphs 31, 32, 42, 49, 51, 101, 114, and 119 of his witness statement where he referred to several documents labeled RA8-RA9, RA10…RA85 and the witness confirmed it. The lawyer also showed him a document where he said there was a 10,929 shortfall of votes in Kano for Tinubu. He was asked about paragraph 114 on his WS where he talked about International Observers. He was asked if he can identify one of those reports if he sees it and the witness said yes.

While tendering the documents as evidence, the petitioners objected, but the respondents did not object.

After the judges admitted the documents, the lawyer continued his questions. He asked Bamidele about paragraphs 19 & 114 of his WS where he referred to a letter from LP forwarding the membership of INEC and a List of Membership Register of Anambra state on April 25th, 2022, and the witness confirmed them. AB Mahmood (INEC) had no questions for the witness.

APC’s lawyer began interrogating the witness. He told the witness he was a former chairman of the senate committee on judiciary and now the majority leader and the witness confirmed it. The lawyer asked the witness if the document that was submitted mentioned Peter Obi as a member of LP and the witness said no. The lawyer asked the witness if it was possible to have a conviction without a charge or an indictment, and the witness said yes.

APC’s lawyer asked the witness about another document in his WS saying that Tinubu has no criminal conviction and the witness confirmed it. The lawyer asked if the document contains conviction or sentencing, and the witness said it does not. The lawyer asked him if he has his NY Bar Association membership and the witness said yes.

Fagbemi SAN (APC) tendered the documents as evidence. While verifying the documents, a judge spotted a business card in the midst and asked Fagbemi if they are tendering the Witness’ business card, but Fagbemi told the judge to disregard it. The judge informed him that they are having difficulties understanding these documents after they brought two exact same ID cards, but the witness stated that he gets his membership card every year, so he included copies of both the new and old cards. The judge asked which is the most recent ID card and he brought it out. The judges are still verifying the documents…

After the judges admitted the documents tendered by APC’s lawyer, Fagbemi, Dr. Livy Uzoukwu (LP) began interrogating the witness.

The lawyer asked Bamidele about paragraphs 136 and 56 in his WS where he said he will rely on reports from local and international reports and the witness said yes. Dr. Livy Uzoukwu showed him the 2023 European Union Observers Report and then tendered it as evidence, but the respondents quickly objected to it.

After the judges accepted the European Union documents, Dr. Uzoukwu read to the court paragraph 6 of page 60 of the 2023 European Union Election Observers Report where it stated that many election results on the IREV were unreadable. He then asked the witness to read paragraph 17 from the ECOWAS Election Observers Report he tendered as evidence, and the witness read it out and then said he does not agree with what was written on it, but Dr. Livy reminded him that he tendered this same document as evidence so why does he not agree with what he just read. The witness replied that he only agrees with the conclusion but not the statement he read.

Dr. Livy went for the jugular by asking the witness if he has a license to practice law in the state of Illinois. The witness said he has a license to practice federal law in the US, but the lawyer fired back asking him to answer the question and not waste his time.
The lawyer talked about the 460k forfeiture and how the court claimed that the money was proceeds from narcotics trafficking. He asked the witness if it was true, and the witness said it was a civil forfeiture and not a criminal forfeiture. The lawyer asked him to answer his questions, but the witness repeated that it was a civil forfeiture.

Dr. Livy asked the witness if he was an IT expert and he said no. The lawyer asked him if he presented any license to practice law in the state of New York and the witness said he didn’t. The lawyer asked him if he knows what IREV is, and the witness said yes. The lawyer asked him if he had access to the IREV throughout the presidential election and the witness said he didn’t. The lawyer informed him that if he doesn’t have access to the portal, then he cannot say whether the results are readable or not, and the witness confirmed he was right. Dr. Livy asked him if he read the order from the Court in Chicago and the witness said yes.

The lawyer informed him that the court granted that order in reference to money laundering, but the witness said it wasn’t in the Chicago court petition. The lawyer asked if he saw the letter from the Nigerian Police and the witness said he saw it. The lawyer asked if he has it with him and the witness said no that the letter which he brought as evidence is a reply to it. The lawyer asked him if the letter mentioned the case in Chicago and the lawyer said yes, that it talked about all criminal records.

Wole Olanipekun (Tinubu) said he didn’t hear the witness’ response to that question, and the witness replied that the report confirmed a general criminal record search and it returned with no criminal records. The lawyer (Dr. Uzoukwu) asked the witness if he knows what a foreign judgment is and the witness said yes. He asked the witness to confirm that this judgment from the US court has nothing to do with money judgment and the witness confirmed it. That ended the questions.

That was a master stroke from Dr. Uzoukwu!

Reactions and comments:

Elle, @sweetsixtien, replies to Oluchi:

Lol… Tinubu lawyer tendered ECOWAS report but are rejecting the report that they tendered with their own hands, same way INEC disowned it’s own documents in Court. It seems APC people from top to bottom don’t read. It’s a problem! We are watching the rascality in 3D.

Oluchi responds:

Despite the unusual number of noisemakers on the internet supporting Tinubu, none of them were qualified to testify in court to defend their drug master. SHAME!

When Dr. Livy said he was ready for demolition, he wasn’t joking.

Here’s what I learned from his interrogation today:

1. The Witness is not licensed to practice in the state of Illinois, therefore, can’t give a legal opinion on Tinubu’s drug money forfeiture case.

2. The witness did not read the ECOWAS Election Observers Report thoroughly, because he agreed with some statements and not all. So why did they tender it as an evidence?

3. The witness and all the respondents do not have a copy of the letter that former IG of police Tafa Balogun wrote to the US embassy to run a background check on Tinubu. What they have is a reply! Where is the original letter? Did Tafar write a letter?

4. The witness is not an IT personal and didn’t have access to IREV and therefore, cannot give a professional opinion about the platform.

Where did APC/Tinubu bring this witness from? Chei!

Success, @RIO_01_, asks:

But ma pls , all this interrogation… are the judges recording them down either in audio or written format for later review? Having some goose bump already. We are winning. Obinwane.

Oluchi replies:

Yes the judges listen and take notes. These guys sitting in front also take notes. I believe some of them are the judge’s assistant who document as well. Then lastly, there are court typist or stenographers in court who capture dialogues and testimonies for every court sitting so that the judges or anyone can go back to it if needed. Nothing is missing.

When Tinubu’s lawyer was proudly announcing the witness’ professional background and academic achievements, I knew they’ve gotten a sketchy character. Something was off!

Meanwhile, why did Olanipekun casually insert the witness’ business card among other documents tendered as evidence? Was it for the judges to call him or what?

Make Una comot monkey hand from soup before e turn to human hand.

Tinubu’s Witness Michael Bamidele, a lawyer, looked all 5 judges at the tribunal and said Money Laundering is not a criminal offense.

Emir Sirdam LP, @EmirSirdam, noted:

Peter Obi/LP brought 13 witnesses, all professionals in their fields. Meanwhile after all the noise loud mouthed frauds like Lastus Keyamo and his fellow Batidiots spew online, in their defense, INEC brought ONLY ONE witness and closed their case. Today, APC/Tinubu legal team brought Only One Witness who testified he is a drug dealer and they have closed their case. It is safe to say PETER OBI IS COMING!!!

Oluchi stated:

This was the moment Tinubu’s witness helped Peter Obi to win his case by submitting the ECOWAS Observation Report but failed to read the part of the report that condemned the election. I told you their witness will testify that Tinubu did not win the election.

https://twitter.com/General_Oluchi/status/1676589107726757891/photo/1

The way one of the judges said loudly to Olanipekun, “why is there a business card in the documents tendered as evidence? Are you also tendering a business card?”

Olanipekun: “you can disregard it, my lord.”

I can’t remember who said it, but It happened when they were verifying Bamidele’s documents and the spotted the business card in the pile.

Highlights of PDP’s interrogation with Opeyemi Michael Bamidele:

The lawyer told Bamidele that according to the Location of FCT report he attached to his WS, Abuja is suppose to be a symbol of our unity, but the witness replied that the statement was subjective, and that every state has its capital city.

The lawyer asked him a trick question: “How many states do we have in Nigeria?”

And the witness replied, “36.”

The lawyer asked him to look at page 51 of that FCT report where the Committee recommended that Abuja as FCT should be specially provided for in the constitution because of its importance, and the witness read it and agreed with him.

The lawyer told him that, by that recommendation, Abuja is a special entity.

The witness replied that it was recommended that Abuja be provided for only.

The lawyer asked him to read out a statement in the report which he did, and the lawyer said: “do you now agree that Abuja is our symbol of Unity?” The witness said yes.

Another interesting interrogation for me was when the lawyer told Bamidele that Tinubu did not score 25% in FCT, Abuja and the witness replied that he (Tinubu) didn’t need to. The lawyer informed him that Buhari and Yardua scored 25% in FCT but Tinubu did not! “I put it to you that Tinubu is the first person who never scored 25% in FCT!”

The witness replied that it wasn’t the intention of the lawmakers to make 25% mandatory.

The lawyer fired at the witness by saying, “Of all the 4 major candidates APC, PDP, LP, NNPP each of those 4 candidates won in their home state except Tinubu!”

The witness said yes. Read more.

— 

©Copyright 2023 News Band

(If you would like to receive CURRENT NEWS updates from News Band on WhatsApp, or Telegram, or wish to send eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to elstimmy@gmail.com and we will respond instantly. Follow us on twitter @News Band; like our Facebook page: News Band.)

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook