Infobytes: PEPT Judgement: Angry Judge Opens Up, Claims Judges Were Bribed, Judgement Written for Them

The Judges of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, PEPT, who delivered the controversial judgment affirming Bola Tinubu as President, amidst a deluge of evidence pointing to illegalities, reportedly received substantial payments. Each of the rogue Judges was alleged to have been paid $5 million, while Justice Haruna Tsammani, who led the Tribunal, received $7 million. An unnamed Appeal Court Judge disclosed this information, expressing anger at the situation.

Furthermore, the anonymous Judge revealed that plans were underway to provide each member of the Supreme Court who would preside over the case with $7 million, and an astonishing $10 million was supposedly earmarked for the Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Olukayode Ariwoola.

According to the Judge, the groundwork for this controversial judgment began with the Gadzama Colloquium, where Retired Justice Mary Odili delivered a speech that seemed to signal the outcome of the Tribunal's ruling.

Allegedly, figures and bribery arrangements were coordinated by individuals such as Wole Olanikpekun, Nyesom Wike, Festus Keyamo, Babatunde Fashola, Lateef Fagbemi, and a few others.

The angry Judge also confirmed that the judgment was handwritten and handed over to the Judges. Justice Tsammani faced difficulties in reading the document due to challenges with the handwriting and wording. It was further revealed that other Appeal Court Judges, notably Justice Monsurat Bolaji-Yusuf, were involved, and some of them expressed anger at the insulting treatment of the Petitioners during the proceedings. Additional Judges on the controversial panel included Justice Stephen Adah, Abba Mohammed, and Moses Ugo.

The Tribunal's judgment, which affirmed Tinubu as duly elected President, is likely to be remembered as one of the most contentious election petition judgments in history. Critics argue that the Judges seemingly ignored critical issues, including Tinubu's alleged involvement in a $460,000 drug crimes forfeiture case in the U.S., accusations of perjury and forgery, and the 25% FCT requirement. Instead, they chose to blame and insult the petitioners, even alleging intimidation and blackmail on social media.

Culled from PointBlank

#newscast