Why Tinubu’s legal team felt that the PEPT judgement was a watershed

The issue surrounding its watermark on copies of the Presidential Elections Petition Tribunal’s ruling that have been widely distributed has prompted a response from the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team.The copy with the watermark has been the focus of debate, particularly on social media, where some have called it a cunning manoeuvre.

In response to the criticism, TPLT organiser Babatunde Ogala chastised the critics in a statement released on Saturday, claiming there was nothing improper about the watermark and that it was the product of planned manipulations.He clarified that after obtaining their copy of the ruling from the Court of Appeal, they watermarked it before sending scanned copies to other team members.

The statement said, “It has become necessary to provide this clarification following some mischievous insinuations being made in certain quarters regarding the innocuous water-mark of copies of the consolidated judgement of the Court of Appeal with the inscription – “Tinubu Presidential Legal Team ‘TPLT’.

“Following the Court of Appeal’s pronouncement of judgement in the three (three) election petitions on September 6, 2023, the Court ordered its registry to provide hard copies of the same on September 7, 2023.In light of this, the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team requested and paid for a Certified True Copy of the aforementioned judgement.

“PDP solicitors arrived at the registry simultaneously in order to obtain the same judgement.In actuality, the PDP representative obtained the first copy that the registrar made available.

Following the acquisition of our own copy, we scanned it right away and watermarked it with the words “Tinubu Presidential Legal Team ‘TPLT'” before sending the scanned soft copies to the other attorneys on our team.

“Any suggestion to the contrary is false, and the stated inscription is not present in the Certified True Copy that the registration provided to us and the other parties in the petitions.

The petitioners’ counsel will also value the fact that, since they possess identical certified copies of the judgement as we do, the rumours circulating in some circles are false, cruel, unfair, and regrettable.