THE Supreme Court on Wednesday put to rest the
controversies which followed its January 29 judgment that set aside the then
incumbent leadership of the Anambra chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party
(PDP) and enthroned the Ejike Oguebego-led group as the authentic faction to
represent the party.
Incidentally, the party had two factions nominated
at parallel primaries, with representatives in the Senate and House of the
Representatives from of the sacked faction of the party.
In view of the judgment,
the candidates from the affirmed faction demanded for the vacation of seats of
the other candidates and threatened to take legal actions against the
Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC if it failed to present them
with certificates of return leading to the approach to the apex Court for
clarifications on its judgment.
Consequently, INEC, in its motion filed on
February 8, asked the court whether, by virtue of the judgment, it should issue
certificate of return to the names contained in the list submitted by the
Oguebego-led Exco or conduct fresh elections.
In its explanation, the court held that the
judgment was specifically in respect of the matters presented before it which
was on the leadership dispute and nothing more than that adding that it did not
adjudicate on the legitimacy or otherwise of the list of candidates submitted
for the National Assembly election by the factions of the Peoples Democratic
Party (PDP) in Anambra State.
The apex court through Justice John Okoro who
read the lead ruling unequivocally stated that though it endorsed the
leadership of Oguebego-led faction by its judgment, it never ordered INEC to
accept the candidates of the faction in the state or to arrogate itself to the
position of the National Executive Council (NEC) of the party which has the
powers to ratify candidates of the party as well as take salient decisions for
the party.
Similarly, the court dismissed the motion filed
and argued by Adegboyega Awomoolo (SAN) for INEC and upheld the objection by
lawyer to the Oguebego-led Exco, Chris Uche (SAN), on the grounds that the apex
court does not engage itself with clarifications on rulings delivered unambiguously
but straightforward and in simple language.
“We have gone through the argument advanced by
counsel to parties. And the court cannot be invited to interpret, justify or
clarify its own judgment based on issues outside the purview of that judgment.
“It is untrue that parties do not
understand the import of our judgment. Where in the judgment did we state that
the Oguebego-led committee should take over the functions of the National
Executive Committee (NEC) of the PDP so that it can submit list to INEC? I
think counsel are not fair to this court when they say they do not understand
the judgment of this court, which was written in simple English language.
“May I admonish counsel, both senior and junior,
that in the course of their job, they have a duty to this court. As much as
they owe a duty to their clients, they also owe a duty to the public not to
mislead them. On the whole, I hold the view that this court lacked the
jurisdiction to hear this motion that was filed on the February 8, 2016. It is
hereby struck out.
“We did not elevate Oguebego to National Chairman
of the party, let alone deciding whether he reserved the authority to submit
list of the candidates to contest the National Assembly from that state.
“We also did not decide or mandate INEC to the candidates to issue certificates
of return because that matter was not before us.
“Since the applicant is unable to convince the
court on whether it has jurisdiction to hear the motion, it is hereby
dismissed. This subtle invitation is simply to cause the court to rewrite the
judgment, and we cannot do so,”Okoro stated.
No comments:
Post a Comment