Persons shortlisted by the party alongside the
governor for prosecution as the perpetrators of the acts are a former Mopol
Commander in the state, Gabriel Selekere and AIG Bala Nasarawa. According to the
APC, the named persons played great and undeniable roles in the rigging which eventually
leaked through a secret audio recording by the Army Officer, Captain Sagir
Koli, of the 32nd Artillery Brigade in Ekiti State two days to the election.
"they
oversaw the conduct of the election and several other officers named as
participants in the alleged criminal manipulation of electoral process that
returned Fayose to power in the June 21, 2014 governorship election."
In a statement by APC Publicity Secretary in
the state, Chief Taiwo Olatunbosun, he said that the party resolved to bring to
the Police boss's attention to the content of the audio tape detailing how the criminal
acts were planned by those mentioned or whose voices were captured in the
tape."
In the petition signed by the State Chairman
of the party, Olajide Awe, entitled (1) "Criminal Complaint Conspiracy,
Bribery, Threats and Use of Military to Perpetuate Electoral Fraud Against the
People of Ekiti State; (2) investigation of the role of the Nigerian Police Force
in the Ekiti State Gubernatorial Elections June 21, 2014," the party was
of the view that following the evidences on ground coupled with Aluko’s
confessions, the culprits cannot be allowed to go scot-free in the interest of
the society.
Reacting to this development, the
Special Assistant to the Ekiti State Governor on Public Communications and New
Media, Lere Olayinka, reportedly said that the latest judgment of the Supreme
Court over leadership dispute within the Anambra State chapter of the Peoples
Democratic Party (PDP), which the apex court said declined jurisdiction to review
had become a precedent, and therefore asked the members of APC in the state to
consider its hope on the review of its judgment of June 21, 2014 as a wishful thinking.
According to Olayinka, “the judgment ended
the APC’s pipe dream of returning to power through an orchestrated review of
the Supreme Court judgment that validated Governor Ayodele Fayose’s
election."
He also noted that on the ruling over
the application filed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC),
the court had emphasized that “Order 8, Rule 16 of the Supreme Court expressly
debars it from reviewing its judgment except on overwhelming circumstances, and
therefore urged the party leaders in the state to stop deceiving other members
with lies pointing to a likelihood of the court revisiting the matter it had hitherto
delivered judgment upon for the purpose of removing Fayose from office.
Analytically, it is pertinent to note that
the incidents in Ekiti State are in no way in resemblance with that of the
leadership tussle which the Supreme Court adjudicated upon. The issue in Ekiti
state bothered on perjury which led to deceiving the apex court with lies to
arrive at its conclusions in favour of the culprits.
In Anambra State, the court rightfully declined
jurisdiction as issues bothering on the rightful candidates of the PDP in
Anambra state were not among the issues presented before the trial and Court of
Appeal, and accordingly, wouldn’t be within the jurisdiction of the apex court
to delve into. Supreme Court only examines the judgments of the inferior courts
to ensure that they were consistent with judicial precedents, and therefore do
not take fresh evidences.
However, in Ekiti State, the Supreme Court
listened to the appeal on the ‘free and fair’ elections on the governorship
election, hence has competent jurisdiction to consider or review it. Nevertheless,
the apex court nullify its ruling based on the revelations, but can direct the
trial court to retry the case which would after that move to the Appeal court
before the apex court. This is anchored on the precedence that the Supreme Court
cannot arrive at a judicial conclusion that is inconsistent with the issues
presented at the High court and appellate court.
Suffice to say that as the apex court had
delivered judgment on the suit, except it gives orders for a retrial which it does
have a competent jurisdiction, no other court of law can raise up the issues
based on res judicata.
Conclusively, with the APC’s petition, the
Inspector-General of Police can approach the apex court for directives and
advice, in view of orders for retrial of the matter, however right from the
trial court which involves time and money.
No comments:
Post a Comment