~Source; Abujapress
Tinubu Shettima
There is palpable tension in the camp of the All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential and vice presidential candidates, Alhaji Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Senator Kashim Ibrahim Shettima respectively, as evidence shows that Shettima is not qualified to contest the election.
This was deduced from two documents submitted by Senator Shettima to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Certified True Copies (CTC) of which were obtained by Mr. Peter Gregory Obi and his party, the Labour Party (LP).
The first document dated July 14, 2022, showed one Ibrahim Kabir Masari, who was originally presented as the running mate to Tinubu, withdrawing his candidacy for Shettima. The document was, however, received and stamped by INEC on July 15, 2022.
The second document dated July 15, 2022, showed Shettima, who was originally the candidate of Borno Central senatorial District, withdrawing his candidacy for o.ne Lawan Kaka Shehu. The document was also received and stamped by INEC on July 15, 2022.
It could be recalled that Labour Party/Peter Obi had petitioned the Presidential Election Petition Court to disqualify Shettima as he was, at the time of the election, not qualified to contest the election.
The Petitioners averred that on the 14th of July 2022, Shettima, contrary to the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022, whilst still being a Senatorial candidate for Borno Central Constituency, knowingly allowed himself to be nominated as the Vice Presidential Candidate to Tinubu on the platform of APC and became the new candidate for the office of the Vice President on that date (14 July 2022).
The Petitioners relied on Form EC11A signed by the Shettima and INEC officials on that same 14th of July 2022.
Responding to the petition, however, Tinubu told the Presidential Election Petition Court that his running mate is eminently qualified to contest the 2023 presidential election.
In the application of his response to the Peter Obi/Labour Party petition before the Tribunal, Tinubu claimed that as at July 14, 2022, when he was nominated as the APC vice presidential candidate, Shettima was no longer APC’s Senatorial candidate for the Borno Central Senatorial election.
According to him, the Notice of withdrawal signed by Shettima on July 6, 2022, was conveyed by officials on the July 15, 2022, to INEC to enable APC present him to INEC as its Vice Presidential candidate.
He further claimed that the date on the Notice of withdrawal is not the date Shettima withdrew from contesting as a senatorial candidate for the Borno Central Senatorial Election.
APC said that Shettima was nominated for VP on the 14th of July though INEC did not receive his withdrawal notice immediately.
Therefore, they will stick to his withdrawal date as the day he wrote the letter and not the day received and stamped by INEC on July 15, 2022.
INEC, on the other hand, said that Shettima wrote the letter of withdrawal on July 6th, but that it did not receive the letter until July 13th, hence, concluded that Shettima withdrew on the 6th.
Reacting to the various positions of APC and INEC, a News Band analyst, who spoke on condition of anonymity opined:
“What INEC is saying is that Shettima wrote a letter of withdrawal on July 6th, but the letter didn’t get to INEC until July 13th of July, therefore, Shettima withdrew on the 6th! Does that sound logical?
“APC is saying that, Shettima was nominated for VP on the 14th of July although INEC hadn’t received his withdrawal notice yet, therefore, they will stick to his withdrawal date as the day he wrote the letter and not the day INEC received it!
“APC said the letter was dated July 6th but delivered to INEC on July 15th. INEC said the letter was dated July 6th but was received on the 13th.
“Anyone can write a notice of withdrawal to INEC but leave it at home for as long as they want, but until the letter is in their hands and stamped as received, INEC can’t say they received it earlier or attempt to backdate that withdrawal.
“The most important thing is both of them should submit their contradictor.
Comments