Atiku, PDP Say INEC’s Server Shows Buhari Was Beaten By 1.6m Votes In Petition Against Buhari’s Election Victory, Revives Alleged Certificate Scam

More details of the petition filed on Monday by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its presidential candidate in the February 23 election, Atiku Abubakar, challenging the victory of President Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC), emerged on Tuesday.The petition was filed against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Buhari and the APC as the first to the third respondents respectively, with 21 Senior Advocates of Nigeria and 18 other lawyers representing the petitioners.

The lawyers are to be led by Mr. Livy Uzoukwu (SAN).

In the 139-page petition, anchored on five grounds, the petitioners told the tribunal that “from the data in the 1st respondent’s (INEC’s) server…the true, actual and correct results” from “state to state computation” showed that Atiku polled a total of 18,356,732 votes to defeat Buhari whom they said scored 16,741,430 votes.”

According to the petitioners, these were the total votes scored by the candidates in 35 states and the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, as the said there was no report on INEC server about the results from Rivers State as of February 25, 2019.

Based on this,  Atiku said he defeated Buhari with 1,615,302 votes.

The PDP presidential candidate also revived the issue of Buhari’s alleged ineligibility to run for the office of the President on the ground that he did not possess the constitutional minimum qualification of a school certificate.

The five grounds of appeal, read, “The 2nd respondent (Buhari) was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election.

“The election of the 2nd respondent is invalid by reason of corrupt practices.

“The election of the 2nd Respondent is invalid by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended).

“The 2nd respondent was at the time of the election not qualified to contest the said election.

“The 2nd respondent submitted to the 1st Respondent an affidavit containing false information of a fundamental nature in aid of his qualification for the said election.”