 Legal battle begins on Monday, the 8th of May as presidential election court tribunal hears petitions from aggrieved parties. And the Africa Media Development Foundation says Nigeria has the highest recorded violations of press freedom. Tonight, in commemoration of War Press Freedom Day, we address challenges faced by journalists in the line of duty. This is PROS Politics. I am Mary Anna Cohn. The presidential election petitions court has fixed Monday for the hearing of the petitions challenging the declaration of the All Progressive Congress's standard bearer Bola Med Tinibu as president-elect. This development, the expected legal battle by candidates disputing the outcome of the 2023 presidential polls, will commence from May 8. President of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Makmudia Kubu, had on March 1 declared Tinibu the president-elect on the grounds that his party scored the major of the majority of the votes cast in the polls. The former Lagos State Governor had polled 8.8 million to defeat Atiku Abu Bakar, the People's Democratic Party, who scored 6.9 million, and Pitobi of the Labour Party that also amassed 6.1 million and 15 others. Now, dissatisfied with the results, Atiku and Abu Bakar found separate petitions seeking orders to annul the elections or declare them the winner of the polls. Joining us to discuss this and more is Right Honourable John Goh Lebo, the immediate past speaker of the Cross River State House of Assembly. And also joining us is Professor Richard Aduchi and Wakko Chahi, the Professor of Law at the River State University in Pothacka. Thank you so much, gentlemen, for joining us and good evening. Thank you very much. Good evening. Yes. All right. I'm going to start by looking at what happened and transpired during the elections and after the elections. What INEC consistently said was go to court. Now, the time is now for all to go to court and many people are saying that this will be a very critical point in Nigeria's election history. But this is not the first time that people have gone to court. And the last elections, the former vice president, Atiku Abu Bakar, also went to court to challenge the votes cast on Election Day and saying that he originally had won the elections. But we all know the outcome of that tribunal. It's not our place to pre-empt it. But I'm going to start with you, John Goh. What do you make of all that transpired during the election and after that? Well, I think this is an election that is physically won driven by too much expectation. And we see too much of expectation by the electorate. INEC has spent a lot of time trying to keep the electorate as to why this election will be the first most transparent election. It gives the impression that this election will be conducted in real time and results will be uploaded in time. And so you could see that the anxiety of the public, the electorate was high, fuelled by the opposition movement had a lot of votes out to it. Who were not impressed by the usual input in the election, who came out of it, particularly the new and the young. And so with what happened at the election, and even following that with INEC's speech after some time about the role of technology in the election, people have tried to manage that credibility before the election. Some of the young people were hoping for such an election. But what happened at the election itself, starting with first the poor deployment of the citizens, and then the fact that the results were not loaded, and the fact that the results were not loaded, some of them we have had the election. You know, has left a lot of worry and concern by the electorate. So when you see the petitions in court, you know, even the INECs go to court. If it's actually part of the election cycle, that first 33 election cycles, there's actual elections process which is the finalest post-election, which is election time. If they write a voting candidate, you know, to go on after post-election to go to court. So I think that what has happened in that a lot of Nigerians have too much hope in INEC after the election. There's a lot of hope. And that's the point then. You can see clearly from the election. When you say Nigerians have a lot of hope in INEC, talking about that hope, INEC had built up the expectations, just as you said, for Nigerians with the introduction of, you know, the transmission of results, which obviously fell face-flat during this election. And it's more like what we ordered and what we got. Billions and billions were air-macked for this elections and what Nigerians expected is not what they got. Now, you're saying that the hope has now been moved to the tribunal, but if this is what we got in the elections, who's to say that there's anything left to call hope from what will come from the tribunal? I'm asking this because you and the professor obviously are lawyers and there has been some sort of trust deficit when it comes to the judiciary in this country. So what's the shred of hope that's left for the average Nigerian to hold on to in preparation for the tribunal's hearings? Okay, so I think the fact is that you have to see if in the case, there's a second chance of this case. And the fact is the second chance of this case is that Nigerians have been subchanged by the process that was set by AIN. You have expressed a type of resistance that the high-nature man in the traditional certain house stated clearly that it is both of the elections which were transmitted in a real-time after probation. And that's the pooling and the reasonable service which was transmitted in the process. The elections were not transmitted from cities, 70 after. You can check the IRS system. You will see that this picture of blue dead in the precinct pooling in the precinct pooling in my home pooling and it was also transmitted almost for after the presidential election. Now that happened all at once. So in a lot of the precinct offices had passwords. They were not working. The precinct wasn't working. They were only going to start speech and they were only going to start speeches. So that's the second aspect. The second aspect is that all at once, it was very obvious that from what happened subsequently in the presidential election, in the government's election, this system was different. You find this where it's all about people at that point. So in Madrid, there's a size of the process of each election, a phase of things, and the field that, you know, I like to know how to be determined by the process in which the elections are not set. When the electoral body is the one telling you who's fault, I mean, it's like, they are not even ready to look at it. It's just that there's some of the issues. The electoral act has given a negative power, so that's what you want to think, to reduce some of the results of the election and then to synchronize it. And so from the complaint you had from the coalition center, from PPP and DPP agents, can you remember, you know, Lulae and Mika Ejeda had complaints, and then you're from the Liberal Party. And the fact that they didn't let the... You know that this election is headed with mud by chaos. The electoral chaos, the fact that what the election transmitted were results that were manually completed. And then transmitted long weeks. You cannot have the results of the presidential election depends on the stations. And for three, four days after the election, would have been announced, not by the police, and so on. So that has brought a lot of issues and pressure on the judiciary. Comfortately, most of the decisions that are made before the judiciary, it's not even much more, but it's not as much as possible about the challenges of the elections. It's about challenges this past, whether I next ought to have transmitted the results at the political center or at the polling unit, or whether it was not transmitted once or about three, whether the candidate who contested the election is to run the election. You are not in a successful challenge in terms of the pooling by pooling the assessment process, because a lot of the electorate and the political party do not believe that even those politicians, accreditation was compromised actually. So once you have the system generated by INEC to meet the results that are already described, it gives you very difficult in terms of challenging the election in terms of statistics of what happened before the election. It's not about what also has happened before the election, who was not part of the election, who did not get 25 seconds, whether the guidelines for the electorate are provided for transmission of the results announced at the polling unit or whether INEC and then INEC for me to say no, we are not outside and I think we are not outside the election that is held by the transmission of that at that point, and that account still lies on the political side. So this is a challenge, and the tribunal has said to not delay the launch of the period of INEC to comply with the process. Let me come to you, Professor Wokoccia. The National Legal Advisor of the All Progressive Congress, who most of these petitions are against, had agreed and confirmed about, confirmed the date, I beg your pardon, for this tribunal to start, but there's something that he said that I want to, you know, push you on. He did say that, yes, they have been briefed on, you know, the hearing, which they are ready for to defend the mandate of, of course, the President-elect, but then he did say that who told you, I'm quoting him, that the election petitions at the tribunal must necessarily be concluded before May 29. So let's look at it. What the law says in terms of these petitions and when the timeline for which it should run for, as opposed to what this man has said, help us to have some clarity. How long is this tribunal supposed to last? And of course, many have also questioned how sacrosanct May 29 is in terms of swearing in the President-elect. I think May 29 is a matter of law. It's sacrosanct. The mandate of the outgoing President will elapse on that date. And it's suspected that the incoming President will take hold on that date and be gazed on mandate. Swearing in has nothing to do with electoral contests and petition activities. What governs that is the law and the section 285 of the Constitution states clearly the time that is allowed the tribunal to handle this matters. Subsection 10 of that section says the tribunal must give his judgment within 180 days from the date of the petition. So they have 180 days. That is the law within which to finish. It has nothing to do with whether it will be before or after the date for swearing in. No. And the fact that the person is sworn in does not put him beyond the reach of the tribunal. The tribunal judgment will determine what the legal position of the parties to the election really is. So it does not matter whether it ends before or after swearing in. But swearing in is a completely different matter. The mandate of the tribunal is 180 days after which appeal must be concluded within 60 days of the filing of the appeal. So I do not think they are directly related and it will be expecting too much and expecting outside the law for anybody to expect that the tribunal must conclude the case before May 29. May 29 is about in seven days from now. It's almost impossible. Let's talk about the petitioners. The PDP and of course the Labour Party. Now some of the arguments that we've heard, obviously I'm sure that you've heard is about the FCT. The FCT has been a subject of the argument and of course the number of votes that you're supposed to have that should qualify you as winner normally in every election. That has been the bone of contention here. Let's break that down again legally and what the constitution say or the electoral act says about the number of votes that you need to have including that of the FCT and the role that the FCT plays in all of this. Section 134 Substitution Section 134 Substitution 4B makes that provision defining the scope the scope of the territory of Nigeria that the winner must win to be qualified to be declared winner where there are the number at least two political parties contesting or more than one candidate contesting and it says he should win one quarter of the votes in each of at least two-thirds of the states of the federal republic of Nigeria and the federal capital territory now I have watched with interest the much argument that has been thrown up over that provision the court is to determine I agree completely but I think I honestly find some of them absurd the constitution is in my opinion referring to the scope of the area you must win beside winning the highest number of votes now there are three rules of interpretation I am sure the court will deal with all these there is the golden rule by which the team is taking from this natural meaning the way it is presented if that does not help you in reaching a position that is conclusive and clear you have the literal rule take the letters by their English meanings and try to make sense out of it and if you do that and it still doesn't solve the problem because it's still capable of two interpretations the last option is the mischief rule the mischief rule requires you to look at the problem that you are trying to solve the problem that the legislature was trying to solve at the time the law was made and what could have been the problem that the Nigeria National Assembly was trying to solve when that provision was made because that provision is different from the provision in the 1979 constitution the mischief that occurred and what happened differently that must have led to the necessity to include the federal capital territory is that under 1979 constitution you did not have a federal capital territory that was not part of a state Legos was the capital Legos was a state so if you say to third of all the states you have covered the entire territory of Nigeria but under the 1999 constitution Nigeria now comprises artistic states and a federal capital territory which is not part of any state so unless you mean that the votes in Abuja are not to be counted then you must include Abuja when you are talking of the territory that must be that the size of the territory that you win when you must win and I think that is where for me at much is that Abuja emerged under the 1999 constitution it did not exist as an extra territory part of Nigeria but under the 1999 constitution Abuja had a community existence as a federal capital that is not part of any state and that provision simply intended rather in the votes of Abuja as part of the at least to third of the territory of Nigeria that is to be won but again as I said this is an issue that the court will pronounce on eventually I can see no reason for the opinion that has been converse on that issue first election is a leveler democracy does not admit of unequal votes all votes are equal all territories are equal so we cannot in the same vein say that there is one territory that must be won what of the 36 states the constitution does not require you to win any particular state says you must win one quarter of the votes in at least to third of the states of the entire country so it simply means you can't Abuja as a 37th territory within Nigeria and there is a section of the constitution remember the exact section that I think is in the interpretation section that says Abuja is to be treated like a state so if that is the case it simply means which will give you 24 states you need to win more than 24 states you must win at least 25 states because there is an additional territory which makes Nigeria a 37th territory structure I think that clearly is what the constitution means but again as I said these are matters that the court will have to decide let me come back to you John the issue of interim government has been bounced around by a couple of people many have said even the Labour Party has asked that governments prosecute and security agencies get these people who are proponent of the issue of interim government what do you think made these proponents come up with this idea why do you think they decided to tell this line well I think clearly the the fact of the declaration of the presence of Abuja was thrown in accordance with the law or that he actually imagine it spends from the past that the opposition party for the past two actions of the interim government he needs that it is no win the election he ought not to have been declared by INX and like Professor Omopo shall say an attempt to delay May 29 let me know what it is for me on the result of the election that is the fundamental issue but like he has already said May 29 is a formal issue that and by practice that may 29 ceremony and over to the incoming president the law does not want to divide them that is why in this instance provided period of time provided for election president he dares to prove that if he doesn't win the election the cost of the power if he doesn't win the election issue another mandate issue another document to any candidate who has a message on this because of the fact that a lot of people very agree that the confidence that INX will submit before the election know they were expecting before the election is no happen at the end and he explains for that I think that you will give your very small perspective to INX-based party and so I will give the impression maybe in the media political party may be interpreting and understanding the position of the electoral act I can tell you as a politician as a member of the political party I see a lot of these agents and leaders of the political party no even understanding the position of the electoral act we got the impression that we are still in the electronic system Nigeria does not have an electronic system if you only provide for electronic and electoral system which is not even a real fact that after the acquisition the number of electoral figures there are after the election six figures of the political party so the impression the wrong perspective drawing that is created by INX social media way over the bill of political party without the proper understanding of the steps of the electoral act we are the manual electoral you made the difference in that election in that series is the technology for the divas from which your data can be captured you see that capturing the three manuals or three systems which you need to be captured it is also the election the election is the conduct of the manual it is also the result that the political party is taking control of the political party it is also the result that the system is doing management the divas instance is not the manifest the best system Nigeria showed the impression that this was the best system was an electronic system that is not even a real fact so we need to know and then INX believes that to do this not be because of the like and the And then there is no room to have someone that still is not going to be elected to be elected. My confusion on the matter is that I believe that we need the secretaries and the government authorities who are feeling credits and who are not by themselves. Look, an agitation by a group of people will not be given legitimacy by a collective conclusion by the public that this is what we ought to see. The group has built that expectation about this issue. If they need to set, if they need to mission on the construction of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, or any of that, the law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, that requires an adherence of that law. That means it's time to ensure that we do not have a vacuum in that public of the pressure. If that thing will be declared the winner of the election, it will be shown in expression of making sense. Of course, the space they have to assemble is finished, and we must have media expectations to remain in focus. Over a blue, maybe longer than the year when they are in office. If the court is happy, they will not possibly elect them. Another statistic of this kind will be that this is the purpose. This is the reason we need to keep quiet people. And then, finally, the education of this party that we do not see the letter as it is not an electronic system. Even the experimentation is not even electronic. So, people got the impression, and this is why the issue of the resource transmitted is all real time. At the end of the day, what we are transmitting is keeping the resource of the manor and the electronic system as it is. So, this issue, we've got a long phase. Just like you said at the opening, we're exposed to what is going. We are stuck there with that meeting, the application of the act, and now the lot of our supporters believe that what is going to be attacked is. That is why they are calling for an internal start-up. I have just one minute. Professor Wakota, let's see if you can do justice to that one minute. All of these blames and finger-pointing mostly point at INIC, with all the monies that we voted to make sure that this elections came out better than ever. But then so many would say that this elections have dragged us back into the dark ages. Who's going to be questioning INIC? Who's going to probe for accountability and for a better INIC? Do you see this happening anytime soon? If you leave it to government, government most of the time is beneficiary of whatever you are complaining about. So, I think what irresponsible and proactive people will do is prepare to campaign for extension of reforms in the electoral system to ensure that we get to the point they thought we were at when this election was held. At the point, I even also got away with that impression that we were heading towards an electronic vote. But if you look at the law, just as John also said, you will find that it is a manual election. What is guaranteed is electronic accreditation, part electronic and part manual because it will still take the register. So, I think the entire hard feeling is based on the interpretation of the law as John pointed out. And I think that what we need to do is stop the blame game, go on with our petitions and then strive to demand more reform in the electoral sector to ensure that we get to the point that we desire. Well, I guess that's the way to go. Thank you very much. Thank you. Well, up next we turn our attention to press freedom and issues affecting journalists globally. Stay with us.