This revelation came as part of the main judgment in the petition filed by Peter Obi and the Labour Party (LP).
Justice Haruna Tsammani, delivering the judgment, emphasized that the witness statements had been deemed incompetent due to their violation of the First Schedule of the Electoral Act, 2022.
Out of the 13 witnesses called by the LP, the tribunal deemed three of them inadmissible as evidence. These witnesses included Professor Eric Ofoedu of Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka (PW 4); Ijeoma Osamor of AIT (PW 7); and Clarita Ogar of Amazon Web Services (PW 8).
Justice Tsammani provided detailed explanations for the inadmissibility of these witnesses and their statements. Professor Ofoedu, PW 4, had admitted in evidence that he had been hired and commenced work before the election, raising questions about his objectivity and credibility as a witness.
Regarding PW 7, Ijeoma Osamor, the tribunal found her admission that video recordings of INEC chairman, Professor Mahmoud Yakubu, were downloaded online to be significant. This admission potentially undermined the authenticity of the evidence presented.
Furthermore, PW 8, Clarita Ogar, was identified as an interested party in the petition due to her status as a House of Representatives candidate of the LP. She also acknowledged attending court hearings as a witness, a practice that contravened the court's rules.
This ruling by the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal has far-reaching implications for the case brought forward by Peter Obi and the Labour Party. The rejection of a majority of their witnesses could impact the strength of their argument and the overall outcome of the petition.
As this legal battle continues, the spotlight remains on the electoral process and the stringent standards applied by the tribunal in evaluating witness testimony. The decisions made in this case may set precedents for future election-related disputes in the country.