The court also knocked the appellants – Atiku and Peter Obi of the Labour Party – challenging President Bola Tinubu’s election for engaging in media trial and reaching conclusions before court rulings.
The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the argument made by Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party that the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal used disparaging words against them.
The court also knocked the appellants – Atiku and Peter Obi of the Labour Party – challenging President Bola Tinubu’s election for engaging in media trial and reaching conclusions before court rulings.
On the alleged use of disparaging words against the appellants in its judgement evincing hostility and bias against the appellants, thereby violating their right to a fair hearing, the presiding justice of the panel, John Okoro, said, “I have read the judgement of the court below and I have seen the contexts for which those words were used and it is my view that they were not meant to disparage the appellants or their counsel.
“As judges, we are trained to be temperate in our use of words and we shall continue to do so. Litigants are advised to trust the court whenever their matters are before it. It is very unbecoming these days that while a matter is pending in court, litigants engage in press conferences, analysing the case, and reaching conclusions.
“Based on this, some of their followers send threatening messages to judges and justices; matters in court are said to be sub judice.”
“Their counsel should refrain from media trials and media judgements. I need not say more on this. A word is enough for the wise. This issue has nothing positive to offer appellants,” he said.
He added that on the whole, “it is my view that there is no merit in this appeal and it is thereby dismissed”.