President Bola Tinubu has warned the presidential elections tribunal against sacking him as president.
According to President Tinubu, such a move could lead to a breakdown of law and order in the country.
The President issued the warning through his lead counsel at the tribunal, Wole Olanipekun, who said the above as part of his final defense.
Recall that Tinubu’s victory in the February 25, 2023 Presidential election is being challenged by the Peoples Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar and his Labour Party’s counterpart, Peter Obi.
While the President’s legal team admitted that Tinubu failed to score 25 per cent of votes cast in Abuja, it argued that was not sufficient enough to overturn his victory as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
On the constitutional requirement for a presidential candidate to 25 per cent of votes in two-thirds of the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, or Abuja, the President’s legal team said courts have always been careful about giving extreme interpretation of the Constitution that could spark chaos.
Olanipekun further argued that voters in the Federal Capital Territory have no special voting rights over voters in other states, stressing that the election cannot be overturned over the result of a single state.
READ ALSO: INEC Deleted Presidential Election Results on BVAS Machine, Witness Tells Trinunal
“Any other interpretation different from this will lead to absurdity, chaos, anarchy and alteration of the very intention of the legislature,” President Tinubu’s legal team said in their final defense to the court.
“Our courts have always adopted the purposeful approach to the interpretation of our Constitution, as exemplified in a host of decisions.
“Even if there was no election in one State (including the FCT), or even if the election of a State/States (including the FCT) is/are voided, the entire election cannot be voided or canceled.
“In concluding our arguments on this issue, we urge the court to hold that any election where the electorate exercise their plebiscite, there is neither a ‘royal’ ballot nor ‘royal’ voter; and that residents of the FCT do not have any special voting right over residents of any other State of the federation, in a manner similar to the concepts of preferential shareholding in Company Law.
“We urge this court to resolve this issue against the petitioners and in favour of the respondent” the lawyers said
