You want to destroy Obi, Atiku's cases - Keyamo tells anti-May 29 crusaders

Pulse reports that there have been calls from certain quarters asking the judiciary to give an expeditious dispensation to the petitions challenging the victory of the president-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, at the February 25 presidential election.

It'd be recalled that the two main opposition parties, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party alongside their presidential candidates, Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, respectively have rejected the outcome of the election.

The duo accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of deliberate bungling of the election to pave the way for the emergence of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate.

They have separately approached the PEPT seeking, among others, an outright cancellation of the result over claims that Tinubu didn't meet all the constitutional requirements to be declared president.

While proceedings at the tribunal are set to commence on Monday, May 8, 2023, it's highly unlikely that the process will be concluded before May 29 when the tenure of the current president Muhammadu Buhari will elapse.

With Tinubu set to take over the mantle while litigations over his elections are still ongoing, opposition supporters and sympathisers have appealed to the judiciary to expedite the process and ensure its conclusion before the handover day.

But, reacting to such calls, Keyamo cautioned that any attempt to rush the process of justice will negatively affect the petitioners' cases at the tribunal.

The Minister, a SAN, noted that the petitioners will require more time to prove their cases except they're willing to make concessions on some of their prayers.

He said these in a statement shared on his Twitter page on Sunday, May 7, 2023, where he also said it's impossible under the present electoral laws and rules of court to determine the cases in such a short period of time.

He said: "Those calling for the determination of the Election Petitions BEFORE the swearing-in ceremonies on MAY 29th under our present electoral laws and Rules of Court and/or procedure are either plainly ignorant or crassly mischievous.

"In future, it is possible to amend our laws and rules of court to accommodate such an idea, but it is clearly IMPOSSIBLE under our present circumstances. Those who think by such a call they are doing the Petitioners any good, do not realise that they are, in fact doing great harm to the cases of the Petitioners.

"It is the Petitioners that need more TIME to prove their cases and not necessarily the defendants. That is why the Petitioners are given 21 days to file and the defendants have 14 days to respond. And the Petitioners have a further 7 days to reply, making a total of 30 days as against the 14 days of the Respondents.

"It follows that in leading evidence in court/Tribunal in support of the Petitions, the Petitioners would also take more time. It is more arduous to prove an Election Petition than to defend it.

"If these characters say a single point (let’s say the FCT 25 per cent storm-in-a-teacup issue) should be set down for determination immediately, would the Petitioners’ lawyers agree to withdraw and abandon all other issues raised in their Petition and proceed only with that issue? Will they take that risk? Ask them privately.

"They know better. This is because the rules of Election Petitions do not allow Petitioners to prove their cases piecemeal. A Petitioner cannot pursue a single point up to the Supreme Court and after losing, return to the Tribunal or Court and say he/she/it wants to now prove other aspects of the case.

"Even that single point alone CANNOT be determined by the Supreme Court BEFORE MAY 29th because of the time given by the rules for parties to file their Notices of Appeal and exchange their briefs.

"It is indeed only the Respondent that can raise a preliminary objection that can determine the Petition in limine (that is, at the threshold). Even at that, the rules allow the Court/Tribunal to take the objection together with the Petition itself and give one judgment at the end in order to save time.

"So, this is free advice to the advocates of pre-May 29th determination of the Election Petitions: they are doing the cases of their Principals (the Petitioners) great harm. They should realise that just as we say ‘justice delayed is justice denied’, we also say ‘justice rushed is justice crushed’."