We have already shown that from the totality of the evidence before the court, the 2nd respondent did not even posses the primary six school leaving certificate or its equivalent. He did not even posses the primary six school leaving certificate or its equivalent. He did not tender it. Consequently, all the purported evidence that was led in supposed satisfaction of the requirement under section 318 (1) subsections C (1), (ii) and (iii) is of no relevance to this petition and must accordingly be discountenanced. We respectfully urge your lordships to so hold.

We further submit on this point, the petitioners are not unmindful of the provision of the last limb of the definition of the term “school certificate or its Equivalent numbered (d) in section 318 of the constitution which provides: ‘(d) any other qualification acceptable by the independent National Electoral Commission. ” We submit that for the 2nd Respondent (PMB) to take refuge under any other qualification acceptable to the independent National Electoral Commission. He must specifically disclose and state the qualification under part c of the 2nd Respondent Form CF001 (which is an evidence as Exhibit P1) in the column where provision is made for schools attended/educational qualifications with dates.

The Evidence (certificate) of such other qualification must also be mentioned and attached to the form. Evidently, Exhibit P1 clearly shows all of the educational qualifications claimed by the 2nd respondent and no evidence whatsoever of any other qualification was attached. No educational certificate has also been pleaded in this petition and none has been tendered in court. It is of course basic common sense that the independent National Electoral Commission cannot consider or accept a qualification which a candidate has not disclosed. The only window for the disclosure of such qualification is in the candidate’s Form CF001, which in this petition is Exhibit P1. We consequently pray your lordships to hold that the qualification of the 2nd respondent to contest the questioned election cannot also be founded under the provision “(d)” under consideration.

It must also be mentioned that as an act of unusual desperation,PMB the 2nd Respondent in Paragraph 4.16 of his address tagged his Form CF001 mysterious in order to water down its effect on his claim to having certificate, although, the 2nd respondent stated at the point of tendering that he objected to the form and would give his reasons later.That objection against is deemed abandoned in so far as he did not advance any reason for his objection against the Form C001 of the 2nd Respondent in his final address hereof. Though, the 2nd Respondent copiously pleaded and listed the said form, he did not tender it in evidence.

With the proves and evidences presented as facts backing the petition challenging the unimaginable victory of PMB in the 2019 Presidential Election.

Our judiciary can not be partisan as Nigerians demand justice based on merit, not on technicality, without yielding to PMB bidding in this case.