The Presidential Tribunal sitting in Abuja on Wednesday struck out paragraphs of the petition made by the Labour Party and its 2023 Presidential candidate and also dismissed 10 out of Obi's witnesses.
6th September 2023 02:25 PM 
The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, on Wednesday in Abuja, struck out about 17 paragraphs from the petition brought before it by Peter Obi and the Labour Party.
A member of the tribunal’s five-member panel, Justice Abba Mohammed, who read the lead judgment, noted that the court struck out the paragraphs for containing “vague and generic allegations”.
Obi and LP are complainants in the petition marked CA/PEPC/03/2023, challenging the election which brought Tinubu to power on May 29.
The petitioners made allegations of irregularities and said they would rely on spreadsheets, inspection reports and forensic analysis filed with the petition during the trial.
In his lead judgement, Mohammed held that the petitioners failed to show which polling units the malpractices alleged occurred; the number of votes affected; and their polling unit agents who reported the alleged irregularities, and malpractices, among others.
Justice Haruna Tsammani, who took over to deliver judgment on the substantive petition filed by Obi and LP, said Obi called 13 witnesses, who testified as PW1 to PW13, noting that of the 13 witnesses, only three witnesses whose statements are on oath, were filed along with the petition.
The Justice revealed that the remaining 10 witnesses, were subpoenaed and their witness statements on oath were only filed after the hearing started holding that by virtue of section 285 of the Nigerian constitution, section 137(7) of the Electoral Act 2022, and other provisions, every witness statement on oath must be filed along with the petition.
He stressed that based on the Supreme Court authority, once the 21-day window for filing an election petition elapses, the content of the petition cannot be amended, noting that no additional statement on oath can be filed after the close of the specified window since the respondents would not have the opportunity to respond.
Tsammani further said the petitioners were aware of the legal provision relating to the filing of witness statements on oath, yet went ahead to present 10 witnesses without their witness statements on oath earlier filed with the petition.
