Alex Enumah in Abuja
The Presidential Election Petition Court (PREPEC) on Monday declined to grant the request of the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, for live broadcast of the court’s proceedings regarding his petition.
The court rejected the request on grounds among others that it lacked merit, it does not advance the case of the petitioners and that there is no policy direction yet regarding live broadcast of court’s proceedings.
A five-member panel of justices of the PREPEC had Thursday, last week, announced that: “Judgment is reserved”, shortly after lawyers to the parties in the petition argued for and against the granting of the application.
The PDP and Atiku, who came second in the February 25 presidential election, are pleading with the court to “allow the televising of the proceedings in this petition given its significant monumental importance”.
Their lawyer, Chief Chris Uche (SAN), in moving the application, also prayed the court for an order directing the modalities for the implementation of the live telecast.
However, the three respondents — the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) — opposed the request, arguing that the request was inappropriate.
INEC’s lawyer, Mr Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), noted that if granted, it will defeat the solemn atmosphere and the seriousness of the court.
Mahmoud in addition argued that with the flooding of the courtroom with all kinds of cameras on their faces including the justices, the proceedings will be brought under undue pressure.
Similarly, Tinubu’s lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), stated that live telecast of the proceedings is not necessary, because the proceedings are already being given effective coverage with the array of journalists seated in court.
While arguing further that it is not a good time for the profession, Olanipekun submitted that the granting the request could put court staff, lawyers and even witnesses at risk.
In addition, he observed that Nigeria is not yet rife for the live broadcast of court’s proceeding because necessary facilities and laws are not in place to guide its implementation.
On his part, APC’s lawyer, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), who equated the televising of court’s proceedings to the ‘Big Brother Naija’ series, said that the application if granted will invade the privacy of even the judges.
Fagbemi further claimed that if granted, it would lead to a situation where petitioners in governorship, National and state Houses of Assemblies election would be demanding live streaming of their proceedings.
“We don’t have the structure and facility, no policy document” he said, adding that even in climes where televising of court’s proceedings are permitted, it is still limited; excluding when witnesses are giving evidence.
After listening to the submissions of counsel, Justice Haruna Tsammani announced that judgment is reserved to a date that would be communicated to parties.
However, delivering ruling in the motion on Monday, Presiding Justice of the five-man panel, Justice Tsammani, held that the request was not rooted from the petition Atiku filed before the court.
Besides, the court stated that if granted, the request is capable of turning the court to a stadium or a market square, adding that public proceedings “does not mean the court must sit in a stadium or a market square”.
In addition, the court observed that the case of Oscar Pistorious, O.J Simpsons and others cited by petitioners in their application does not apply to the Nigerian judiciary.
While Justice Tsammani observed that “the application is a novel one” in the country and has not been provided for in any of the court’s rules or procedures, he held that for the court to do that, judicial policies and regulatory frameworks have to be put in place.
The panel accordingly dismissed the motion for lacking in merit.
Court Declines Atiku’s Request for Live Broadcast of Proceedings
Alex Enumah in Abuja
The Presidential Election Petition Court (PREPEC) on Monday declined to grant the request of the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, for live broadcast of the court’s proceedings regarding his petition.
The court rejected the request on grounds among others that it lacked merit, it does not advance the case of the petitioners and that there is no policy direction yet regarding live broadcast of court’s proceedings.
A five-member panel of justices of the PREPEC had Thursday, last week, announced that: “Judgment is reserved”, shortly after lawyers to the parties in the petition argued for and against the granting of the application.
The PDP and Atiku, who came second in the February 25 presidential election, are pleading with the court to “allow the televising of the proceedings in this petition given its significant monumental importance”.
Their lawyer, Chief Chris Uche (SAN), in moving the application, also prayed the court for an order directing the modalities for the implementation of the live telecast.
However, the three respondents — the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) — opposed the request, arguing that the request was inappropriate.
INEC’s lawyer, Mr Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), noted that if granted, it will defeat the solemn atmosphere and the seriousness of the court.
Mahmoud in addition argued that with the flooding of the courtroom with all kinds of cameras on their faces including the justices, the proceedings will be brought under undue pressure.
Similarly, Tinubu’s lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), stated that live telecast of the proceedings is not necessary, because the proceedings are already being given effective coverage with the array of journalists seated in court.
While arguing further that it is not a good time for the profession, Olanipekun submitted that the granting the request could put court staff, lawyers and even witnesses at risk.
In addition, he observed that Nigeria is not yet rife for the live broadcast of court’s proceeding because necessary facilities and laws are not in place to guide its implementation.
On his part, APC’s lawyer, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), who equated the televising of court’s proceedings to the ‘Big Brother Naija’ series, said that the application if granted will invade the privacy of even the judges.
Fagbemi further claimed that if granted, it would lead to a situation where petitioners in governorship, National and state Houses of Assemblies election would be demanding live streaming of their proceedings.
“We don’t have the structure and facility, no policy document” he said, adding that even in climes where televising of court’s proceedings are permitted, it is still limited; excluding when witnesses are giving evidence.
After listening to the submissions of counsel, Justice Haruna Tsammani announced that judgment is reserved to a date that would be communicated to parties.
However, delivering ruling in the motion on Monday, Presiding Justice of the five-man panel, Justice Tsammani, held that the request was not rooted from the petition Atiku filed before the court.
Besides, the court stated that if granted, the request is capable of turning the court to a stadium or a market square, adding that public proceedings “does not mean the court must sit in a stadium or a market square”.
In addition, the court observed that the case of Oscar Pistorious, O.J Simpsons and others cited by petitioners in their application does not apply to the Nigerian judiciary.
While Justice Tsammani observed that “the application is a novel one” in the country and has not been provided for in any of the court’s rules or procedures, he held that for the court to do that, judicial policies and regulatory frameworks have to be put in place.
The panel accordingly dismissed the motion for lacking in merit.
