YOBE state governor, Alhaji Bukar Abba Ibrahim has said
that Monday�s Appeal Court judgement indicated that the presidential
election claimed to be won by Chief Olusegun Obasanjo has brought shame to
the country especially as the court has admitted massive rigging in the
elections.
According to him, based on the court�s findings and the
judgement passed by one of the four judges who faulted the entire election
Nigerians do not have a genuinely-elected president.
He pointed out that the president claimed by Peoples
Democratic Party was elected under a massively rigged election and false
results among other things.
Also speaking shortly after the judgement, the counsel to
Gen. Buhari, Chief Mike Ahamba, explained that although the judgement went
against their prayers for now, but he is delighted that all the four judges
had admitted that there was bias on the part of Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC).
He explained that perhaps it is necessary for the Supreme
Court to now decide upon the necessary consequences of a biased body in a
matter where interests are involved.
Chief Ahamba who said there is still hope in continuing
with the case, however, said he is going to discuss with his client and will
come out with a statement on the issue.
On why there has to be four judges for the case, Chief
Ahamba said that two to two judges would have made a stalemate, saying that
is the reason why there has to be three to one judge for there to be a
judgement, he added.
�I am going out disappointed with the judgement, but not
with the personnel of the court,� he noted.
Responding to a question, Ahamba said: �They gave us a
fair hearing but their decision was not in accord with our discussion which
does not in anyway build any bad blood on our minds about the Justice, we
only disagree with the reasoning and we have the right to appeal� he added.
Also speaking with Daily Triumph correspondent
outside the court, the counsel representing Obasanjo, Chief Afe Babalola who
was also trying to drive a point home, explained that there is no where in
the whole world where one can have a totally free election, saying that for
one to be expecting something utopia is impossible.
�If there were few areas where there were malpractices as
long as such malpractices do not affect the totality of the judgement there
is nothing wrong with the whole thing at all,� he added.
He further explained how unfortunate it was for them not
to be able to appeal against the dissenting judgement saying that the
dissenting judgement, is no judgement at all, but that it is majority
judgement that is judgement, he said.
While praising himself he said, �after 19 months of hard work, I am happy
indeed to put the whole matter behind� stressing that the case is the most
difficult case he has ever handled for a long time.
