The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the February 25, 2023 presidential election, Atiku Abubakar, and President Bola Tinubu’s teams clashed over the watermark on a viral copy of the judgment of the Presidential Elections Petition Court. Here are the key points from the situation:
Watermark Controversy: A Certified True Copy (CTC) of the court’s judgment had the watermark of the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team on it, causing speculation and controversy.
PEPC Urged to Explain: Atiku’s camp called on the Presidential Elections Petition Court (PEPC) to explain why the watermark of the President’s legal team appeared on the CTC of the judgment. They questioned why copies given to the petitioners did not have the same watermark and whether this implied special privileges for the Tinubu legal team.
Denial and Explanation: President Tinubu’s legal team coordinator, Babatunde Ogala, defended the watermark, stating that the PDP collected the first copy of the judgment, not the President’s team. They explained that they watermarked their copy after collecting it from the Court of Appeal before distributing scanned copies to their team members.
Atiku’s Encouragement: Atiku’s running mate, Peter Obi, encouraged supporters not to be discouraged by the judgment and to keep hope alive. He emphasized that the struggle to reclaim their ‘mandate’ was a marathon, and they should remain resilient.
Support for Tinubu: Minister of Works and former Ebonyi State governor, David Umahi, declared that Bola Tinubu was ordained by God to lead the country and urged Obi and other Igbo stakeholders to support him.
Meeting Supreme Court Deadline: Both Atiku’s and Obi’s legal teams expressed determination to meet the 14-day deadline to file an appeal at the Supreme Court, despite the initial delay in receiving the CTC of the judgment.
Oyetola’s Prediction: Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Adegboyega Oyetola, predicted that the Supreme Court would affirm Tinubu’s victory, expressing confidence in the tribunal’s judgment.
This situation reflects the ongoing controversy and legal battles following the presidential election, with both sides making claims and counterclaims regarding the authenticity of the judgment copies and their intentions.