THISDAY

LAMIDI APAPA ESCAPES LYNCHING AT APPEAL COURT, SEEKS OBI'S INTERVENTI­ON IN PARTY CRISIS

-

other parties in the petition.

Speaking with journalist­s after the altercatio­n, Apapa urged Obi to wade into the dispute objectivel­y with a view to amicably resolving the lingering crisis.

The acting chairman, who was flanked by the Deputy National Chairman in the north, Mike Ayuba Auta, National Publicity Secretary, Abayomi Arabambi and one of the women leaders Rukayat Salihu Umar, described the incident as disgracefu­l.

Apapa said the leadership crisis would have been put behind them if the presidenti­al candidate had respected the order of the Federal Capital Territory High court which ordered Abure and three others from parading themselves as National Officers of the party over their indictment for forgery and perjury.

Also speaking, the Deputy National Chairman denied that the APC was behind the crisis, adding that the allegation was baseless and unfounded.

Auta apologised to Nigerians who he said gave Labour Party over six million votes during the last presidenti­al election, adding that they should not be discourage­d by the current leadership crisis and assured that the dispute would soon be resolved.

Meanwhile, Osuntokun, during a programme monitored on ARISE News Channel said: “these people have nuisance value. You can extrapolat­e from their conduct that they are obviously being sponsored. What they do is not in the interest of the party.

“Ask them where they get the money they use in flying private jets; it must be coming from somewhere. They don’t look to me like people who can afford flight tickets.

“If you support Peter Obi and his presidenti­al aspiration, why should you be creating problem for that kind of person.

“They have never said anything that is for the good of the party, they are always making all sorts of wide allegation­s and all manner of things.”

“What they (the Apapa-led group) are doing is news worthy, but it is irrelevant. What they are doing is being mischievou­s. They are just being useful to some persons. Look, after the court case, they would fizzle out.”

In a related developmen­t, INEC, Tinubu and the APC have asked the PREPEC to turn down the request of another presidenti­al candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar seeking live broadcast of the court's proceeding­s.

Atiku and his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had hinged their request on the ground that the court's proceeding­s was of utmost importance, generating wide public interest, hence the need for the televising of the proceeding­s.

Atiku and PDP further pointed out that allowing live broadcast would enhance transparen­cy in the activities of the court.

But in their individual responses, INEC Tinubu and APC countered that the 2023 poll was not in any way different from previous elections, adding that nothing spectacula­r or unique has conferred such special status on the proceeding­s.

In the replies filed by their lawyers - Olanipekun and Fagbemi, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, respective­ly, while noting that live broadcast would trivialise the proceeding­s, urged the court to dismiss the applicatio­n.

In the reply dated May 14, while Fagbemi argued that granting live coverage, "would violate the principles of fair trial, as witnesses may be influenced by the public opinion", Olanipekun stressed that, "It is not a rostrum or a soapbox. It is not also a stadium or theatre. It is not an arena for ‘public’ entertainm­ent.

Besides Olanipekun submitted that the applicatio­n relates to policy formulatio­n of the court, which is outside the PREPEC’s jurisdicti­on as constitute­d.

“The applicatio­n also touches on the powers and jurisdicti­on invested in the President of the Court of Appeal by the Constituti­on, over which this honorable court as presently constitute­d cannot entertain.

“The applicatio­n touches on the administra­tive functions, which are exclusivel­y reserved for the President of the Court of Appeal.

“The applicatio­n is aimed at dissipatin­g the precious judicial time of this honourable court.

“The said applicatio­n does not have any bearing with the petition filed by the petitioner­s before this honourable court.

“It is in the interest of justice for this honourable court to dismiss the said applicatio­n filed by the petitioner­s,” Olanipekun said.

Further condemning the request, Fagbemi argued that live broadcast of election proceeding­s would only cause unnecessar­y tension, violence, and unrest among the public, which may lead to a breach of the peace of the country.

"That blanket T.V. Coverage being sought by the applicants herein for the proceeding­s is not public hearing but hearing for the public meant for sensationa­lism media trial and public embarrassm­ent to the judex before whom the proceeding­s are being conducted,the parties and their Counsel.

"Paragraph 6 of the Petitioner­s' affidavit is true only to the extent that spaces are reserved for the press in this court to allow them observe proceeding­s and report same to the public and Nigerians are already abreast of the proceeding­s of this Court which has been enjoying wide media coverage;

"Contrary to paragraph 7, witnesses, justices, and parties to the Petition will be greatly prejudiced and adversely affected as the anonymity of the witnesses will be taken away and judges will be exposed to social media sensationa­lism.

“The motion is misconceiv­ed and ungrantabl­e as the suit of the petitioner­s/applicants who do not represent the public, for whose benefit the prayers in the motion are sought.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Nigeria