State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Abuja to discontinue further
hearing on the petition that was lodged against him by the All Progressives Congress,
APC, and its candidate in the April 11, 2015, governorship election in the state, Dr.
Dakuku Peterside.
In a ruling Monday, the Justice Muazu Pindga-led tribunal dismissed separate
preliminary objections that challenged its jurisdiction to hear and determine the petition
outside Rivers State.
Though it was the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, that firstly queried
the constitutionality of the tribunal having its sittings in Abuja, subsequently, both Wike
and his party, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, also filed their own objections.
Arguing through its lawyer, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, INEC maintained that the action of
the tribunal in relocating its sitting to Abuja was in gross violation of section 285(2) of
the 1999 constitution, as amended.
It contended that going by the aforementioned section of the constitution under which
the tribunal was established, “a tribunal sitting in Abuja cannot qualify as a tribunal
established in Rivers State”.
INEC further argued that the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab
Bulkachuwa, lacked the powers to voluntarily relocate the tribunal to Abuja when a state
of emergency has not been declared in Rivers State.
“The reason ascribed to this anomaly is that there was pandemonium, chaos in Rivers
State. But my lords should take judicial notice that the Court of Appeal is currently
sitting in that state, likewise the Federal High Court. The seat of government is there
and very functional.
“It is our contention that the only constitutional exception to the provision of section
285(2), is in line with section 304 of the constitution dealing with the power of the
President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to declare a state of emergency in any
state. As it stands today, there is no such declaration in Rivers State.
“It is therefore our submission that the power vested on the President of the Court of
Appeal is not such that enables her to override the provisions of the constitution”, INEC
added, even as it placed reliance on the decided case law in Ogboru vs Ibori.
Both governor Wike and the PDP supported the position of INEC, arguing that in line
with the provisions of the constitution, the proceedings of the tribunal in Abuja
amounted to nullity.
In his motion dated June 30 and supported by a 22 paragraphed affidavit, Wike further
contended that Peterside was not validly nominated by the APC to contest the Rivers
State governorship election.
He argued that under section 85(1) of the Electoral Act, as amended, the APC ought to
have given INEC 21 days notice before it held the primary election that produced
Peterside as its candidate.
Wike adduced an exhibit showing that whereas APC’s notice to INEC was dated
November 18, 2014, it eventually held the congress that produced Peterside on
December 4, 2014.
“By any form of arithmetical calculation, that is far less than 21 days. Any candidate
produced outside the provision of the Electoral Act is not a qualified candidate for the
purpose of an election”, argued Wike’s lawyer, Mr. Emmanuel Ukala, SAN.
Similarly, the PDP through its lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, urged the
tribunal to strike out reliefs 1-4 of the petition by the APC on the ground that they were
not properly framed.
However, the petitioners (APC and Peterside), prayed the tribunal to dismiss all the
preliminary objections for want of merit.
Counsel to the petitioners, Chief Akinlolu Olujunmi, SAN, maintained that the tribunal was
legally empowered to sit in Abuja.
”My lords we deposed in our counter-affidavit that there was a widespread violence,
kidnapping, bombing, maiming, and other form of violence in Rivers state. It was the
reality of the situation that the PCA, in a very motherly consideration and feelings,
directed that the tribunal should sit in Abuja.
“At the last count there are about five other tribunals sitting in Abuja today and none
has declined jurisdiction. The law is settled that where a situation arises which has not
been provided for by the constitution, the doctrine of necessity will empower the
authority to take appropriate decision and action to address the given situation”,
Olujunmi submitted.
Delivering ruling on the matter, the Justice Pindga-led panel held that its proceedings in
Abuja has legal validity.
While dismissing objections against its jurisdiction as grossly lacking in merit and
substance, the tribunal, said it has not violated any provision of the law since the
relocation to Abuja was based on security reasons.
The tribunal also waved aside arguments by the respondents on proximity and
accessibility of the materials that were used for the election and witnesses that are
proposed to testify before the court.
Source : Vanguard
No comments:
Post a Comment