Uche made the remark on Tuesday in response to Justice Tsammani’s response to his request to allow him present five junior lawyers as team members against the recommended three names.
In the course of announcing the appearance of the petitioner’s legal team, Uche craved the indulgence of the court to permit him to announce five names adding that he stumbled upon “Order 3 Rule 11″ which provides the allowance.
But Justice Tsammani countered him and told him to maintain the agreed three names in respect to the presidential election.
” Agreement is agreement,” the Justice said.
Responding, the learned silk responded, ” My Lord, there were many agreements in this election that were broken.”
“We were not part of that,” the Justice replied.
The PDP and its presidential candidate are challenging the emergence of Bola Tinubu as the president-elect in the February 25 presidential elections on the grounds that the Independent National Electoral Commission failed to electronically upload the entire accreditation data as promised as of the time the winner was declared.
Furthermore, the petitioners argued that Tinubu did not secure at least one-quarter of the votes cast in the presidential election in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja adding that out of the total votes of 478,652 cast in the FCT, Abuja, Tinubu, was polled only 90,902 which amounted to 18.99% of the votes.
“The petitioners shall contend that to be declared duly elected, a candidate, in addition to obtaining not less than a quarter (25%) of the votes cast in at least two-thirds of all the states, must also receive at least one quarter (25%) of the votes cast in the FCT, Abuja”.
In the alternative, they want the court to declare that Atiku be returned as the winner of the said election and be sworn in as the duly elected President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Alternatively, also, the petitioners are praying for an order from the court directing INEC to conduct a run-off between Atiku and Tinubu.
