Yesterday, the Supreme Court set May 26 as the date for issuing its judgment regarding an appeal that questions the eligibility of the President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, from the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, to participate in the presidential election conducted on February 25.

The opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has filed an appeal marked SC/CV/501/2023 before the court, aiming to disqualify President-elect Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and Vice President-elect Senator Kashim Shettima. PDP argues that the nomination of Shettima as a vice presidential candidate by the APC and Tinubu violates Sections 29(1), 33, 35, and 84(1) and (2) of the Electoral Act, 2022, as amended.

The PDP presented evidence to the court indicating that Shettima was nominated for both the vice presidential position and the Borno Central senatorial seat, which the PDP argued was a violation of the law.

In addition to seeking the nullification of Tinubu and Shettima's candidacy, the appellant also requested the court to order the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to remove their names from the list of nominated or sponsored candidates eligible to participate in the presidential election.

Meanwhile, a panel of five judges from the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Inyang Okoro, approved the case for judgment after all parties presented their final arguments.

During the proceedings, the PDP, represented by Mr. Joe Agi, SAN, urged the court to support their argument by overturning the judgment of the Court of Appeal. On the other hand, Mr. Babatunde Ogala, SAN, the counsel for Tinubu and the APC, sought the dismissal of the lawsuit, claiming it lacked merit.

Furthermore, the respondents argued that the case had become time-barred as the allowed period for hearing and determining such pre-election cases had expired.

INEC, represented by its lawyer Mr. Adebiyi Adetosoye, expressed its support for Tinubu and the APC's request for the appeal to be dismissed, along with substantial costs.

Furthermore, all the respondents raised concerns about the legal right (locus standi) of the PDP to initiate the action and questioned the court's jurisdiction to intervene in matters concerning the nomination of a candidate for an election. They argued that such issues pertained to the internal affairs of a political party.