Justice Abba Mohammed, a member of the five-member panel of justices, conveyed a crucial decision regarding the eligibility of Peter Obi as the Labour Party's candidate in the presidential election.
The All Progressives Congress (APC) had raised petitions questioning Peter Obi's eligibility, but Justice Mohammed stated that membership in a political party is an internal matter.
This declaration signifies a firm stance on the tribunal's part regarding the internal affairs of political parties and their selection of candidates.
However, another facet of the tribunal's judgment revolved around the witnesses presented by Peter Obi and the Labour Party in their case against President Bola Tinubu's victory.
Justice Haruna Tsammani, during this phase of the judgment, delivered a verdict that could have far-reaching implications.
Out of the 13 witnesses presented by Peter Obi and the Labour Party, Justice Tsammani rejected 10 of them. He highlighted a critical issue with these witnesses: their statements had been filed after the hearing had already commenced.
This action was deemed contrary to the legal provisions governing the submission of witness statements under oath.
According to Justice Tsammani, only three of the 13 witnesses had been properly filed along with the petition, while the remaining 10 had their statements submitted after the hearings had begun. This oversight, regardless of whether it resulted from a lack of knowledge of the legal provisions, led to their statements being invalidated.
These developments mark significant milestones in the ongoing legal battle surrounding the presidential election. While the tribunal upheld the internal autonomy of political parties in selecting their candidates, it also enforced stringent rules regarding the submission of witness statements. These rulings could have profound effects on the trajectory of the case and its ultimate outcome.
As the legal proceedings continue, all eyes remain on the tribunal's deliberations and the potential implications for the political landscape and electoral processes in the country. The decisions made in this case may set precedents for future election-related disputes in Nigeria.