The Presidential candidate of People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar on Tuesday called President Muhamadu Buhari’s kinsman and Chairman of PDP in Katsina State, Salisu Maijigiri, who told the Presidential election tribunal that he (Atiku) defeated the president in his home state.
Atiku who continued his challenge of President Muhamadu Buhari’s victory at the polls called nine additional witnesses
In his bid to void the election of February 23 on the grounds of non-compliance with electoral laws, violence, thuggery, non-accreditation of voters and non-qualification of Buhari to contest the election.
The witnesses who were led in their evidence in chief by Atiku’s counsel, Dr. Livy Uzoukwu (SAN) at the tribunal were Tanko Birch from Niger State, Salisu Yusuf Maijigiri, PDP State Chairman, Katsina State, Salisu Garba Funtua, Abdusalam Idris, Aliu Umar Ustas, Ibrahim Musa, Audu Sanni, Balarabe Usman, Umar Alhaji, Abubakar Wali and Uchenna Umeh.
They all maintained that in Katsina, Kebbi and Niger where they voted and monitored the election, that the presidential poll was characterized by rigging, allocation of votes to parties, use of thuggery to cause mayhem, non-accreditation of voters, over-voting, cancellation and alteration of election results as well as the use of police to intimidate, harass and force them to do their biddings on the election day.
However, another witness, Audu Sani, told the tribunal, that he could not remember the date of the last presidential election.
Sani, who was the PDP collation agent in Lapai Local Government Area of Niger State for the presidential election, adopted his deposition wherein, he alleged that there were incessant incidents of thuggery and sporadic shootings in many parts of the area, preventing and disrupting voting.
When cross-examined by counsels to INEC, Buhari and APC, Yunus Usman (SAN), Wole Olanipkekun (SAN) and Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), Sani said he submitted the results he collated in his local government to the state collation agent of his party.
Asked by the APC counsel, Fagbemi (SAN), when he submitted the results, he said he did on “the 26th.”
Asked which month, he said “April 26.”
Asked when did the election hold he said “23rd.”
When pressed further to mention the month, he said, “I cannot remember.”
In his evidence, Salisu Maijigiri, who is the Chairman of Katsina State PDP told the tribunal that the 1, 555, 633 votes credited to President Buhari were not the true reflection of what transpired on the election day, maintaining that the figure was just allocated to the winner.
He alleged that agents of PDP in the 34 local government areas of the state were chased away while INEC ad-hoc staff were substituted with untrained ones used to produce fake results in the state. Maijigiri insisted that PDP won in Katsina State with 905,000 votes while APC came second with 872,000 votes from the result collated by his party.
Under cross-examination, by counsel to the respondents, Maijigiri said contrary to the results declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission, the results collated by his party in the state showed that APC polled 872,000 while PDP scored 905,000.
The results INEC declared for the state, however, showed that PDP polled 160,203 votes while the APC polled 1,505,633.
Contradicting INEC’s results, Maijigiri said: ”We (PDP) are the one who won the election, not APC.
“APC scored 872,000 and PDP scored, 905,000.These are our own results, we collated in our state not the ones from the server.”
When it was the turn of an Assistant Presiding Officer 1 (APO) during the last presidential election, Mr. Ogunsanya Abiola, he testified to the effect that the INEC did not disclose the name of the server into which the results of the poll were said to have been electronically transmitted.
Abiola said INEC only gave them a confidential code with which to access the server, adding that the code was issued early in the morning on the day of the election.
Cross-examining the witness, another counsel in INEC’s legal team, Fabian Ajogu (SAN), asked the witness to give the name and the number of the server into which he claimed to have transmitted the results of the election in his polling unit.
Responding Abiola said: “I personally transmitted the election information to INEC server. There is no name or number.
“We were only given a code with which to transmit the election information to the server.”
Another witness Salisu Garba Funtua, a local government collation agent, alleged over voting on the election day because the card readers were abandoned.
He further claimed that election was canceled in several places due to the failure of the card reader.
Under cross-examination by Olanipekun, the witness maintained that the election was not free or fair because of over voting and other malpractices.
Another witness, Abdulsalam Idris in his own testimony told the tribunal that Atiku and PDP never conceded defeat to Buhari and APC because the February 23 election could not be called an election in the full meaning of democracy.
Another witness, Aliu Umar Ustas, who was a local government collation officer for Atiku alleged that police connived with APC members to cheat the PDP. Under cross-examination by counsel to APC, Lateef Fagbemi SAN, the witness emphasized that his party collated detail result and that the result was kept with the party.
In his own evidence, Tanko Birchi, a lawyer and businessman admitted that he was not physically present in all polling units but received oral and written complaints of irregularities that characterized the election and that the complaints were delivered to the party national secretariat.
Responding to a question from the APC lawyer, the witness said that he heard that President Buhari was a general in the Nigerian Army and that he was in primary school between 1983 and 1985 when Buhari was a military president.
In his own testimony, Uchena Umeh, who was the 17th witness confirmed that as an Assistant Presiding Officer I (APO) during the last presidential election in Gwarinpa, Abuja, he transmitted the results of the poll to the server of the Independent National Electoral Commission.
Under cross-examination by Buhari’s lawyer, Abubakar Mahmud (SAN) as the APO I, Umeh said he was on the day before the election given the code with which he transmitted the results of the poll at his polling unit to INEC server.
He said: “In the course of the training, they told us there was an INEC server.
“A code was given to us and they told us that only APO I should know the code.”
Responding to another question, he said: “It will be wrong to state that election would not be held in a polling unit if the card reader failed to authenticate a permanent voter card.”
Another witness, Abubakar Wali told the tribunal that he dismissed the election because it was marred with a lot of irregularities.
The witness who acted as an agent of the two petitioners in Bauchi State informed the tribunal that those who carried out the alleged electoral malpractices were not put on trial by police because they acted as agents of the All Progressives Congress (APC).
In all, the petitioners called a total of 13 witnesses to substantiate their allegations against the February 23 election.
Meanwhile the tribunal has adjourned sitting till Thursday, July 11.