The Presidential election Petition Tribunal in the Lead Judgment ruled that Buhari is qualified to stand for the presidential election and possess relevant educational qualifications especially the West African School Certificate as required by law.
Since the Nigerian Army had confirmed to have Buhari’s records as a commissioned officer before been enlisted into the Army at Kaduna in 1962 and also consequent upon the written undertaking to the military by the principal of Provincial Secondary School Katsina, then there is inference that the Army must have received or sighted Buhari’s certificate.
That Buhari attended Provincial Secondary School, Katsina which was in existence in 1962 contrary to Atiku’s petition.
The tribunal therefore ruled that Atiku failed to prove that Buhari lied in his affidavit attached to form c.f. 001 (particulars and credentials of candidates) submitted to INEC to stand for the presidential election.
That even if Buhari failed to call evidence and witnesses as to his educational qualification, the petitioner Atiku Abubakar of the PDP failed to prove that Buhari was not qualified.
Atiku’s position that Buhari’s return and declaration as the winner of the presidential election contrary to the requirement of the law and having not scored the highest number of lawful votes cast is wrong and unsubstantiated.
It is not only for the petitioner Atiku to tender documents, he must also call witnesses.
There is no provision in our Electoral Act for the electronic transmission of results either through Server or Smart card reader as posited by Atiku.
That under our current law, a valid transmission of results at Polling Units, Ward Collation up to final collation must be done manually.
The main and only purpose of smart card reader is to authenticate the holder of the card and cannot surpass the Voters Register.