The Independent National Electoral Commission on Wednesday reacted to the allegation by the legal team of the Labour Party and its candidate, Peter Obi suggesting that the commission has refused to respond to the court order served on them.
The LP and Obi in a petition marked CA/PEC/03/2023 are challenging the outcome of the presidential election wherein Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress was declared as the elected president by INEC.
During the processing, the petitioners had previously stated that the electoral commission had denied them access to some sensitive documents which are germane to their pleadings.
While moving the motion for adjournment of the hearing on Wednesday afternoon, counsel for the petitioners, Livy Uzoukwu SAN again complained to the Presidential Election Petition Court that despite the effort made to access documents under the commission, INEC has “consistently disagree…the court warrant to produce documents.”
He continues to say that he had to bring it to the notice of the lead counsel for INEC, A.B Mahmoud who guaranteed him that the commission would comply.
Displeased with the statement that implied that his client was unhelpful, counsel for INEC, Kemi Pinhero SAN who conducted Wednesday’s proceedings on behalf of the electoral body countered the assertion.
He accused the petitioners of constantly blaming them for withholding documents from them and urged them to desist from the “habit”.
He said, “Don’t use INEC as a Scapegoat.”
He said he was unaware of any discussion, Uzoukwu SAN may have had with their lead counsel, Mahmoud, to warrant the statement.
“It can’t be true that the receipt or the court order were decline.”
“It has become a habit for them to blame INEC has refused to release documents to them.
“It is not correct that the office of the chairman will not respond to the court warrant. The chairman of INEC has no interest whatsoever. It is unfair to INEC.”
“If they have nothing else to do today, they should just say it.”
In response to the reaction, Uzoukwu maintained his stance and informed the court that his claims can easily be confirmed.
Following the argument between the two parties, the Presidential Election Petition Court headed by Justice Haruna Tsammani advised them to calm their unravel nerves.
The court thereafter postponed the matter to June 15 for continuation of the hearing.
