Peter Obi’s statement that he did not have evidence concerning the outcome of the 2023 presidential election was made in the strict legal sense, his Media Adviser, Valentine Obienyem, has said.

Obienyem explained that Obi was referring to evidence capable of satisfying the legal standard required by the courts to overturn the declared result.

“The courts, for whatever reasons, did not consider the evidence presented sufficient to do so,” he said.

He, however, distinguished between legal proof and reasonable inference, arguing that circumstances surrounding the election continued to raise legitimate questions.

“Looking at what actually happened on election day, the technology worked in other elections but stopped working for the presidential election at a point when Peter Obi was clearly leading in several results being collated. The moment they switched off the server, the results took another dimension,” he said.

Obienyem said that while this might not constitute evidence sufficient to win a case in court, it could still generate a reasonable inference about what happened.

He added that, with the Supreme Court having made its final determination, “following the mind of the court, one can say that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish the case to the required legal standard.”

“However, outside the courtroom, and looking at the events as they unfolded, it was clear to many Nigerians that Peter Obi had won the election,” he said.

According to him, the court determines what has been legally proved, while citizens remain entitled to reason about what they witnessed.

“A court’s inability to establish a claim to the required legal standard does not necessarily erase every reasonable question about what actually happened,” Obienyem said.

He maintained that accepting the finality of the Supreme Court’s decision does not prevent continued public discussion of the circumstances surrounding the 2023 election.