Kogi PDP guber tussle. 29th, Make or Mar
Written by Yekini Jimoh, LokojaCheck us out on youtube @ onafentsat9
AS the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja set to deliver judgment over the rightful gubernatorial candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the last December governorship poll, Yekini Jimoh examines issues that may shape the ruling.
COME tomorrow, the Federal High Court, sitting in Abuja, will deliver judgment in the suit filed to unseat the Kogi State governor, Idris Wada.
The winner of the January 2011 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) primaries, Jibrin Isah Echocho and a governorship aspirant, Oyebode Makinde, had concurrently instituted suits asking the trial court to declare the swearing-in of Wada as the governor of Kogi State invalid.
However, the political atmosphere in the confluence state is already tensed with fears on whether or not a presiding judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Abdu Kafarati, will, on Wednesday, use the judgment of the Supreme Court in the appeal filed by ex-Governor Timpre Sylva against the election of Seriake Dickson in Bayelsa State as a precedent.
The issue is simply between the primaries conducted and won by Echocho and that which was won by Wada despite protest by the former that his ticket was still subsisting. The appellant [Echocho] is asking the court to validate the January 9, 2011 PDP governorship primary election which he won. On the contrary, the ousted former governor of President Jonathan’s state then challenged his exclusion by the PDP in the second governorship primaries won by Dickson.
The Supreme Court had dismissed Sylva’s suit for lack of jurisdiction on the grounds that the issue of primary election is the exclusive affairs of the party.
The question is, to what extent are the two suits similar or different from each other? And how would the differences or similarities legally affect the decision of the trial court in anyway.
Before the emergence of Captain Idris Wada as the standard bearer of the PDP in the Kogi state governorship election of December 3 ,2011, Jibrin Isah emerged as the governorship candidate of the party at the January 9, 2011 governorship primary election held at the Lokoja township stadium and was so returned as the flag bearer of the party for the April 26,2011 General elections.
Unfortunately, the victory of Echocho was short lived as the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on February 23, 2011 elongated the tenure of five state governors beyond May 29, 2011,Kogi state inclusive.
The Court of Appeal had also ruled that the tenure of five governors including Kogi state had not expired, hence the postponement of the general election in Kogi State and four other states of Adamawa, Bayelsa, Sokoto and Cross River.
However, INEC evoked the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Appeal No:SC/357/2011 vide it’s notice of Appeal dated July 14, 2011 asking the court not only to set aside the judgments of the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal elongating the tenure of the Governors but also to dismiss their claim.
The Supreme Court acceded to INEC’S appeal and granted all her reliefs/prayers on the January 27, 2012, stating clearly that the tenure of former Governor Ibrahim Idris and four others ended on the May 2011.
From the implication of the apex court pronouncement, Wada was sworn as the duly elected governor of the state, after his victory at December 3rd governorship election in Kogi State.
This led Echocho, through his counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, asking the court to determine whether having regard to the combined effects of Sections 26(1), 26(2), 87(1) 87(2) (3) and (4)(b) of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended, the valid and due nomination of the plaintiff (Isah) and submission of his name by the PDP, 1st defendant, to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the party’s governorship candidate in the Kogi State 2011 governorship election can be vitiated by the postponement of the election from April 26 to December 3, 2011?
He also asked the court to determine whether the PDP could validly have conducted another special state congress for the governorship primary election in September 2011 for governorship election having sent his name to INEC as its rightful candidate?
He posited that he cannot be substituted with any other name except as provided in Section 33 of the Electoral Act as amended .While countering the reliefs sought by Echocho, Chris Uche (SAN), counsel for Governor Wada said, “there is nothing unique about the plaintiff’s case because there is a precedence of a similar misadventure which recently ended in misfortune at the Supreme Court.
Citing the recent case of Sylva vs PDP, Uche (SAN) maintained that every right claimed by Echocho for having won the January primaries had been extinguished by the Supreme Court judgment as the two cases were similar in every material particular.
A cursory glance at the suits shows that the causes of action for approaching the courts are not the same. But the crux of the matter is that, are the differences substantial enough to sway the trial judge to decide differently from the Supreme Court judgement in the Sylva’s case?
According to Ade Okeaya-Inneh (SAN), there is a big distinction between the two suits which in law is cogent enough to assuage a learned judge to decide differently. “In Sylva’s case, the primary election was cancelled by the PDP which was why the apex court excused itself from going into the merit of the case. But in Echocho’s case, the primary election was never cancelled”.
Sylva’s dispute was against the PDP for refusing to allow him to contest the party primaries of November 19, 2011 for the general elections of February 12, while Echocho’s case challenged INEC’s action of conducting an election during the pendency of its own suit against the tenure elongation. Sylva’s cause of action therefore was hinged on refusal of his party to publish his name as an aspirant for the primary election; hence the Supreme Court concluded that it was a pre-primary election matter.
Echocho legal team also argued that while Sylva was involved and benefitted from the tenure elongation case which led to the re-scheduling of the April general elections, their client was at no time a party to the tenure elongation suit. Moreso, Sylva’s case was not hinged on the January 27 judgment of the Supreme Court which voided the tenure elongation and therefore it was fundamentally different. Besides, Kogi is the only state where the sitting Governor did not seek re-election among the five states involved in the tenure elongation case.
So, none of the candidates was a party to the tenure elongation suit. They further stated that after INEC had filed a notice of appeal at the Supreme Court on the July 14, 2011, its authorities erroneously directed the parties to conduct another primary on 22 September 22, 2011.And that, while the same electoral umpire addressed the Justices of the Supreme Court on 29 November, 2011, asking the jurists at the apex court to dismiss the judgment of both the High Court and the Court of Appeal, four days later, it conducted elections in Kogi on the December 3, 2011.
But, counsel to INEC, led by Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) in his submission to Echocho’s prayers said the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter because the plaintiff is asking the court to interprete the judgement of the Supreme Court on tenure elongation and also asking it to give a consequential order. He further submitted that Section 251(1)(q)(r)(s) of the 1999 Constitution did not permit the court to do such a thing, adding that the court had no power or right to interpret what the constitution will imply in the judgement of the Supreme Court.
Whether the trial court would depart from the Supreme Court judgement in the Sylva’s case is just a matters of few days away from now. The immediate past Chief justice of Nigeria (CJN), Dahiru Musdapher recently said that the Supreme Court possess liberty to depart from its earlier judgment. That is where issues are similar or nearly the same. But one thing is crystal clear at the moment in Kogi state, and that is the tensed political atmosphere, which is laden with anxiety and palpable fear.
This is because, if Justice Kafarati set aside the swearing-in of Wada and order a fresh election, political stakeholders in Kogi state would begin to sing a new tune and perhaps prefer such situation that would allow them to go back to the drawing board.
The winner of the January 2011 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) primaries, Jibrin Isah Echocho and a governorship aspirant, Oyebode Makinde, had concurrently instituted suits asking the trial court to declare the swearing-in of Wada as the governor of Kogi State invalid.
However, the political atmosphere in the confluence state is already tensed with fears on whether or not a presiding judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Abdu Kafarati, will, on Wednesday, use the judgment of the Supreme Court in the appeal filed by ex-Governor Timpre Sylva against the election of Seriake Dickson in Bayelsa State as a precedent.
The issue is simply between the primaries conducted and won by Echocho and that which was won by Wada despite protest by the former that his ticket was still subsisting. The appellant [Echocho] is asking the court to validate the January 9, 2011 PDP governorship primary election which he won. On the contrary, the ousted former governor of President Jonathan’s state then challenged his exclusion by the PDP in the second governorship primaries won by Dickson.
The Supreme Court had dismissed Sylva’s suit for lack of jurisdiction on the grounds that the issue of primary election is the exclusive affairs of the party.
The question is, to what extent are the two suits similar or different from each other? And how would the differences or similarities legally affect the decision of the trial court in anyway.
Before the emergence of Captain Idris Wada as the standard bearer of the PDP in the Kogi state governorship election of December 3 ,2011, Jibrin Isah emerged as the governorship candidate of the party at the January 9, 2011 governorship primary election held at the Lokoja township stadium and was so returned as the flag bearer of the party for the April 26,2011 General elections.
Unfortunately, the victory of Echocho was short lived as the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on February 23, 2011 elongated the tenure of five state governors beyond May 29, 2011,Kogi state inclusive.
The Court of Appeal had also ruled that the tenure of five governors including Kogi state had not expired, hence the postponement of the general election in Kogi State and four other states of Adamawa, Bayelsa, Sokoto and Cross River.
However, INEC evoked the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Appeal No:SC/357/2011 vide it’s notice of Appeal dated July 14, 2011 asking the court not only to set aside the judgments of the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal elongating the tenure of the Governors but also to dismiss their claim.
The Supreme Court acceded to INEC’S appeal and granted all her reliefs/prayers on the January 27, 2012, stating clearly that the tenure of former Governor Ibrahim Idris and four others ended on the May 2011.
From the implication of the apex court pronouncement, Wada was sworn as the duly elected governor of the state, after his victory at December 3rd governorship election in Kogi State.
This led Echocho, through his counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, asking the court to determine whether having regard to the combined effects of Sections 26(1), 26(2), 87(1) 87(2) (3) and (4)(b) of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended, the valid and due nomination of the plaintiff (Isah) and submission of his name by the PDP, 1st defendant, to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the party’s governorship candidate in the Kogi State 2011 governorship election can be vitiated by the postponement of the election from April 26 to December 3, 2011?
He also asked the court to determine whether the PDP could validly have conducted another special state congress for the governorship primary election in September 2011 for governorship election having sent his name to INEC as its rightful candidate?
He posited that he cannot be substituted with any other name except as provided in Section 33 of the Electoral Act as amended .While countering the reliefs sought by Echocho, Chris Uche (SAN), counsel for Governor Wada said, “there is nothing unique about the plaintiff’s case because there is a precedence of a similar misadventure which recently ended in misfortune at the Supreme Court.
Citing the recent case of Sylva vs PDP, Uche (SAN) maintained that every right claimed by Echocho for having won the January primaries had been extinguished by the Supreme Court judgment as the two cases were similar in every material particular.
A cursory glance at the suits shows that the causes of action for approaching the courts are not the same. But the crux of the matter is that, are the differences substantial enough to sway the trial judge to decide differently from the Supreme Court judgement in the Sylva’s case?
According to Ade Okeaya-Inneh (SAN), there is a big distinction between the two suits which in law is cogent enough to assuage a learned judge to decide differently. “In Sylva’s case, the primary election was cancelled by the PDP which was why the apex court excused itself from going into the merit of the case. But in Echocho’s case, the primary election was never cancelled”.
Sylva’s dispute was against the PDP for refusing to allow him to contest the party primaries of November 19, 2011 for the general elections of February 12, while Echocho’s case challenged INEC’s action of conducting an election during the pendency of its own suit against the tenure elongation. Sylva’s cause of action therefore was hinged on refusal of his party to publish his name as an aspirant for the primary election; hence the Supreme Court concluded that it was a pre-primary election matter.
Echocho legal team also argued that while Sylva was involved and benefitted from the tenure elongation case which led to the re-scheduling of the April general elections, their client was at no time a party to the tenure elongation suit. Moreso, Sylva’s case was not hinged on the January 27 judgment of the Supreme Court which voided the tenure elongation and therefore it was fundamentally different. Besides, Kogi is the only state where the sitting Governor did not seek re-election among the five states involved in the tenure elongation case.
So, none of the candidates was a party to the tenure elongation suit. They further stated that after INEC had filed a notice of appeal at the Supreme Court on the July 14, 2011, its authorities erroneously directed the parties to conduct another primary on 22 September 22, 2011.And that, while the same electoral umpire addressed the Justices of the Supreme Court on 29 November, 2011, asking the jurists at the apex court to dismiss the judgment of both the High Court and the Court of Appeal, four days later, it conducted elections in Kogi on the December 3, 2011.
But, counsel to INEC, led by Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) in his submission to Echocho’s prayers said the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter because the plaintiff is asking the court to interprete the judgement of the Supreme Court on tenure elongation and also asking it to give a consequential order. He further submitted that Section 251(1)(q)(r)(s) of the 1999 Constitution did not permit the court to do such a thing, adding that the court had no power or right to interpret what the constitution will imply in the judgement of the Supreme Court.
Whether the trial court would depart from the Supreme Court judgement in the Sylva’s case is just a matters of few days away from now. The immediate past Chief justice of Nigeria (CJN), Dahiru Musdapher recently said that the Supreme Court possess liberty to depart from its earlier judgment. That is where issues are similar or nearly the same. But one thing is crystal clear at the moment in Kogi state, and that is the tensed political atmosphere, which is laden with anxiety and palpable fear.
This is because, if Justice Kafarati set aside the swearing-in of Wada and order a fresh election, political stakeholders in Kogi state would begin to sing a new tune and perhaps prefer such situation that would allow them to go back to the drawing board.
No comments:
Post a Comment