BY Ikechukwu Nnochiri
ABUJA—The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal sitting at the Abuja Division of the Appeal Court, will today, determine the fate of the National Publicity Secretary of the Congress for Progressive Change, CPC, Mr Rotimi Fashakin, who it earlier handed  seven days to adduce reasons why he should not be committed to jail over his alleged attempt to ridicule the judiciary.

The 5-man panel of justices hearing the petition challenging the April 16 presidential election that brought President Goodluck Jonathan into power, had on October 4, issued a subpoena against the CPC scribe, following a press release he allegedly circulated to various media organizations in the country on September 28, wherein he accused the panel of justices at the tribunal of dragging “the nation’s judiciary to the abyss.”

The petition, which is seeking a nullification of the presidential election on the premise that it was rigged by the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, was filed by the CPC.

Meanwhile, sequel to the decision of the Justice Kumai Bayaang Akaahs-led panel to vacate a summon it previously issued against the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, Professor Attahiru Jega, asking him to personally appear in court over his alleged refusal to furnish the petitioner with some of the sensitive materials used in the conduct of the presidential poll, the CPC scribe issued the controversial press release, decrying the decision of the tribunal.

Fashakin had in the said press release, which equally culminated in the appearance of the News Editor of the Tribune Newspaper Mr Dickson Edward and a correspondent, Christian Okeke, before the court, posited that “indeed, as a party, we are not under the illusion that this crop of players in the Judiciary, with entrenched ‘cash and carry’ culture, can do justice.

However, as an article of faith to the Nigerian People, we shall continue to ‘hang in’ there; using the instrumentality of the law to expose the banality of our justice system. We shall continue to hold our heads high in the hope that these current retroactive elements in the Judiciary shall soon fade away.”

Irked by the publication the court ordered the alleged author of the publication, Fashakin, to come and show cause why he should not be sent to prison for contempt.