Robert Clarke, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), says the judgment of the presidential election petition tribunal was the correct one.
He also said many Nigerians learned a lot from the ruling of the tribunal.
Speaking during an interview on Arise TV on Wednesday, Clarke said he accepts the ruling of the tribunal on Vice-President Kashim Shettima’s double nomination as good and correct.
The Allied Peoples Movement (APM) had filed a suit against the eligibility of President Bola Tinubu and Shettima to contest in the February 25 election.
The double nomination case had spurned many arguments despite being dismissed by the supreme court in a ruling on May 26.
The presidential election tribunal on Wednesday, ruled that the APM’s petition was “devoid of any merit”, adding that the party is not qualified to challenge the eligibility of a candidate in a different political party.
The tribunal also dismissed the petition of Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP), and that of Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), as “vague” and “lacking in merit”.
It is not a surprise to many of us but we have learned a lot that from what has happened now,” Clarke said.
“There is necessarily going to be an appeal to the supreme court on this matter because many issues have been raised in this ruling that needs more clarification to either of the parties in this litigation.
“I am of the view that this particular point of law that has just been adjudged upon is necessarily going to be a point of appeal to the supreme court.
“And I look forward to this point being raised so as to finally settle that area of law that is still lingering over the question of double nomination.
“It is very exciting and illuminating that these issues have been taken up previously before the supreme court, and as the learned justices in the present tribunal said, they are bound by the supreme court judgment on this particular ruling and as such, it is going to be an interesting appeal.
“I will hopefully think that either parties to this litigation can still have the hope that when the matter goes up to the supreme court, the matter will be revisited in a more illuminating manner to some of our listeners who are yet to feel the impact of the judgment because this is not the final judgment.
“This is just a preliminary part of the judgment.
“I agree with the tribunal that this is a pre-election matter, and cannot be handled by this tribunal because by law, the electoral act upon which the tribunal is acting upon only allows it to look into the conduct of an election and not to look at matters that are not part of the election procedure.
“What I’m saying is that the tribunal is correct and the judgment of the tribunal is good.
“I, Robert Clarke, accept the judgment as a true and correct judgment.”
Credit- The Cable
