The Director General of the Peter Obi Presidential Campaign Organisation, Akin Osuntokun has again rejected the outcome of the Presidential Election Tribunal judgment which affirmed the victory of President Bola Tinubu at the polls.
The Labour Party (LP) chieftain who lamented the prevalence of corruption in Nigeria alleged that the judiciary might also not be left out of the mess.
He reiterated that the party and its presidential candidate, Peter Obi are resolute in their decision to challenge the tribunal ruling at the Supreme Court.
Speaking in an interview with ARISE NEWS on Monday, Osuntokun part of the implication of the tribunal judgement is coming to terms with the implication of Nigeria as a failed state in which all organs of government have been affected by the corruption virus.
He however added that the Labour Party is bent on going to the Supreme Court because it believes the tribunal gave a wrong verdict in its judgement.
“My view of it all is that we are in a systemic crisis. We are coming to terms with the implication of Nigeria as a failed state in which all organs of government have been equally affected by the pathogens of corruption,” he said.
The politician said despite all the happenings, the party has no ties with those who are allegedly threatening members of the judiciary but added that the anger of such persons can be easily justified by the lack of trust in the Nigerian judicial system.
He added that “Allegations of corruption against the judiciary whether directly or indirectly have very square legs to stand on. We may question the tactics of President Buhari, but when he sent security forces to the houses of supreme court judges some years ago, they discovered tons of money in different currencies.
“So it’s an unmerited righteous indignation to say that we are angry, as if there is no justification for people taking that position against you.”
“The implication of Nigeria as a failed state, as a country that tops the chart for corruption, is that if a country tops that position, why should you not accept difficulty in accepting that the judiciary is equally affected?”
