Keyamo Explains Why APC Had To Take Atiku Citizenship Case To Tribunal

Festus Keyamo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, and The Director for Strategic Communications for President Muhammadu Buhari during the 2019 presidential campaign, while speaking on Channels Television on Sunday night stated that reasons why APC had to file a case against the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.

Last week, we reported that the All Progressives Congress filed a case at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal in Abuja that reported that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar was not fit to run in the last Presidential elections, claiming that Atiku is a Cameroonian by birth.

See Also : IPOB Reacts To The Recent Controversy Surrounding Alhaji Atiku’s Citizenship

APC further stated that the petition filed by Atiku Abubakar against President Muhammadu Buhari be dismissed due to the fact that it lacked proper backings.

Keyamo, who also serves as a spokesperson for the All Progressives Congress while speaking on Sunday night said the decision of the APC to bring the matter to court was a decision that was made by over 18 senior advocates of Nigeria, San, representing President Buhari and the All Progressives Congress at the Election Petition Tribunal in Abuja.

While Keyamo was asked to speak about the fact that Alhaji Atiku had previously served as a vice president in Obasanjo’s regime for eight years does not count for him, Keyamo responded by saying that the fact is irrelevant.

He said: “Did you have access to security reports then; did the court look at that issue at that time? We are talking of qualifications to be President of Nigeria, not qualifications to be a Customs officer.

“The matter has never been tested in court before does not provide a platform for someone to keep doing something that is wrong

“The issue of citizenship was just one of the six grounds raised to challenge the petition filed by the PDP at the Tribunal.”

Keyamo mentioned that since the matter was already in court, he did not see reason to go into the details of the matter. He rather advised everyone who cared about the case to painstakingly read the amended Section 131 as well as the Section 25 of the 1999 Constitution.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *