Breaking News: Presidential Election Petitions Court Rules on APM's Challenge to APC Nomination

In a significant legal development, the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led Presidential Election Petitions Court has recently made a crucial decision regarding the challenge brought forth by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) against the nomination of President Bola Tinubu and Kashim Shettima as the flagbearers of the APC in the February 25, 2023 presidential election. The court's ruling sheds light on the complexities of pre-election matters and jurisdiction.

The Jurisdiction Dilemma:

In a courtroom filled with anticipation, the tribunal delivered its judgment on the APM's petition. The essence of the ruling revolved around the court's assertion that it lacked the jurisdiction to hear this particular case. According to the court, issues of qualification or disqualification are constitutional matters and should be addressed before an election takes place. The tribunal emphasized that such disputes are essentially pre-election matters and, therefore, should be dealt with at a high court level.

The Elapsed Timeframe:

One pivotal factor that played a role in this decision was the elapsed timeframe. The tribunal pointed out that the 180-day limit for resolving this issue had already passed, further strengthening the argument that the matter should have been addressed well in advance of the election.

Constitutional Reference:

The court referred to sections 131 and 137(1)(a)(j) of the Nigerian Constitution, emphasizing that these sections govern matters of qualification and disqualification. It also highlighted that the dispute in question pertained to the internal affairs of a political party and should not be the concern of another political entity.

APM's Claim:

The APM's contention revolved around their assertion that both Tinubu and Shettima were not validly nominated to contest the February 25 election. Their argument hinged on a meticulous reading of sections 131(c) and 142(2) of the Nigerian Constitution, 1999, as well as Section 133 of the Electoral Act. The APM contended that the 21-day period between Kabiru Masari's withdrawal as an APC placeholder on June 24, 2022, and Shettima's nomination on July 14, 2022, violated Section 33 of the Electoral Act, 2022, which allows for a 14-day window for the replacement of a candidate in an election.

Conclusion:

This ruling by the Presidential Election Petitions Court has significant implications for the ongoing political landscape in Nigeria. It highlights the importance of addressing matters of qualification and disqualification well in advance of elections and underscores the need for political parties to adhere to election regulations meticulously. As the political season unfolds, this decision will undoubtedly continue to reverberate through the corridors of Nigerian politics. Stay tuned for further updates on this unfolding legal saga.