Counsel for the PDP and Atiku, Chris Uche, SAN, said this when he countered the application moved by INEC’s counsel, Kemi Pinhero SAN during Friday’s proceedings at the Presidential Election Petition Court.
The PDP and Atiku are in court to challenge the declaration of Tinubu as the winner of the February 25 election by INEC.
The electoral umpire through its counsel had moved a motion on notice praying the Court to strike out some of the allegations made against Tinubu by Atiku in his petition.
The electoral body pleaded with the court to strike out 32 allegations made against Tinubu by Atiku in the petition challenging his victory.
INEC said that the allegations which formed 32 paragraphs in Atiku’s petition should be discountenanced by the court for lack of jurisdiction among others.
But Uche SAN filed a counter affidavit in opposition to INEC’s request and asked the court to dismiss the electoral body’s application.
He argued in the counter affidavit that it was not the duty of INEC to defend Tinubu.
Specifically, Atiku’s lead counsel insisted that INEC ought to be neutral but somersaulted by turning itself into a “busybody and meddlesome interloper” in taking up the defence of Tinubu against the provisions of the law.
He said, “INEC is fighting a proxy war on behalf of Tinubu which a neutral body should not do.”
He, therefore, asked the Court to dismiss INEC’s motion for being a gross abuse of court process, lacking in merit and grossly incompetent.
Meanwhile, the chairman of the court, Justice Haruna Tsammani, has fixed the ruling till the date of judgment in the substantive petition.
