The Tinubu Presidential Legal Team (TPLT) has issued a response to the recent uproar over the watermark found on widely circulated copies of the judgment of the Presidential Elections Petition Tribunal (PEPT). This watermark has sparked controversy on social media, with some critics raising concerns about its implications.
In a statement released by the TPLT coordinator, Babatunde Ogala, on Saturday, the team expressed dismay at the insinuations made by critics, dismissing any claims of foul play associated with the watermark. According to Ogala, there is a simple explanation behind it.
He clarified that the watermark was added to their copy of the judgment after they received it from the Court of Appeal, before they distributed scanned copies to their legal team members. Ogala’s statement sought to put to rest the controversy surrounding the watermark.
The statement reads, “Following some mischievous insinuations being made in certain quarters regarding the innocuous watermark of copies of the consolidated judgment of the Court of Appeal with the inscription – ‘Tinubu Presidential Legal Team ‘TPLT’,’ it has become necessary to offer this clarification.”
He continued, “After the delivery of judgment in the 3 (Three) election petitions by the Court of Appeal on September 6, 2023, the Court directed its registry to make physical copies available on September 7, 2023. Accordingly, the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team applied for a Certified True Copy of the said judgment and paid the prescribed fee.”
Ogala emphasized that lawyers for the PDP were also present at the registry to collect the same judgment. “In fact,” he noted, “the representative of the PDP collected the first copy that was made available by the registry.”
He further explained, “On collecting our own copy, we immediately scanned and watermarked it with the inscription – ‘Tinubu Presidential Legal Team ‘TPLT” before circulating the scanned soft copies to the lawyers in our team.”
Ogala concluded by stating, “The Certified True Copy issued to us and other parties in the petitions by the registry does not contain the said inscription, and any insinuation to the contrary is untrue. Counsel for the petitioners will also appreciate the fact that the insinuations being circulated in some quarters are untrue, unkind, unfair, and unfortunate, as they have the same certified copies of the judgment as we have.”
With this statement, the TPLT aims to dispel any doubts and set the record straight regarding the watermark on their copy of the PEPT judgment.
