>
Akinwande Soji-Ojo
The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT) has rejected the requests by the presidential candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party (LP), Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi , for live broadcast of its proceedings.
A five-member panel of the court led by Justice Haruna Tsammani held that the application lacked merit.
Atiku made the request for the live broadcast of the tribunal’s proceedings on May 7, while Obi followers suit few days later.
The former vice president had said televising the proceedings will enhance public confidence.
Arguing the motion, Chris Uche (SAN), counsel to Atiku had said: “There is no single legislative or statutory position against it.”
He said a live broadcast doesn’t necessarily mean the faces of the justices would be shown.
Also, the lead counsel for Obi, Awa Kalu (SAN), argued that Nigerians being stakeholders have a right to have real-time information about the election petition proceedings.
However, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC, president-elect and APC vehemently opposed the application, describing it as frivolous.
They argued that the application relates to policy formulation of the court, which is outside the PEPT’s jurisdiction as constituted.
Counsel for APC, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), asked the court not to concede the request to turn the court into “a Big Brother electoral series.”
In the same being, counsel to the president-elect, Wole Olanipekun (SAN), noted that the live broadcast if approved, would expose both the judges and lawyers to danger while counsel to INEC, Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), argued that the application was needless, since “the court is a public place and is accessible to all, subject to the availability of space.”
After hearing the arguments from all the parties last Thursday, the court reserved ruling on the applications till Monday (today).
Ruling on the applications on Monday, Justice Tsammani said televising the court cases is not provided for by the constitution and the powers are “not resided hereon.”
“This panel sitting as Presidential Election Pettition Tribunal only has the power to listen to presidential cases.
“The issue of televising is a policy matter. This court has no power to write that policy.
“However, the justices have authority to give a legal right or enforce the televising of proceedings for the case of fair hearing and justice.
“This motion is hereby dismissed,” he said.