Another Official Responds To Alleged Resignation Of Presidential Election Court Judge, Boloukuoromo Ugo
Another official has dismissed the report of the resignation of a member of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), Boloukuoromo Ugo, describing it as false and misleading.
News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Umar Bangari, who is the Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal, which serves as the secretariat for all election petition courts and tribunals across the country, dismissed the reports on Thursday.
Mr Bangari also appealed to the general public to ignore the fake news in its entirety.
According to him, there is no iota of truth in the report.
Earlier on Thursday, PREMIUM TIMES reported that Kabir Akanbi, a deputy registrar said, “It is not true that my Lord, Honourable Justice Ugo resigned from the Presidential Election Petition Court.”
Also denying the resignation report, Mr Bangari explained that Mr Ugo was still on the court’s five-member panel at the last hearing on the petitions by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), Labour Party (LP) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
He faulted the report saying neither his office nor the information department of the court was contacted before dishing out what he called a false report.
NAN reports that the Labour Party and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, and PDP, alongside Atiku Abubakar, are before the court challenging the declaration of Mr Tinubu as president.
NAN also reports that the news about Mr Ugo’s purported resignation broke in the early hours of Thursday and spread rapidly on the Internet.
An online report stated that Mr Ugo resigned his panel membership, citing demands from the executive branch that he believed would destroy the country’s democracy.
It added that Mr Ugo alleged that siding with the government on the petitions challenging the election of President Bola Tinubu would be the “death of Nigeria’s democracy”.
He reportedly said that he could not in good conscience remain silent.
According to the judge’s purported statement, he was asked to “cripple the independence of the judiciary” by ruling in favour of a certain political candidate whom he did not name.
He was also said to have alleged that he was asked to suppress evidence and dismiss cases that could have an impact on the election.