Atiku explains why Supreme Court should hear fresh evidence on Tinubu

Opposition politician Abubakar Atiku says the Supreme Court should admit the fresh evidence he presented to it against President Bola Tinubu’s victory.

He also told the court to discountenance Tinubu’s argument that the process is statue-barred.

Atiku appealed to the apex court after he failed to get the Court of Appeal to upturn Tinubu’s victory and declare him the winner.

Arguing further, Atiku’s lawyer, Chris Uche (SAN), said the Court of Appeal is restricted to disposing off of election petitions within 180 days, as it is with tribunals.

He added it was the reason Court of Appeal preferred to be called the Presidential Elections Petitions Court and not a tribunal.

“The Constitution was intentional and deliberate in setting the 180 days limit only for Election Tribunals, and not for the Court of Appeal,” Uche wrote in their court documents.

Using that as a basis, Uche said the Supreme Court could hear the fresh evidence even though it was not pleaded during the hearing of the substantive case by the Court of Appeal.