The Lumine News

Category: 2023 General Election

  • Otu Calls On Sandy To Accept The Court Of Appeal Ruling And Join Hands With Him To Rebuild Cross River State

    Otu Calls On Sandy To Accept The Court Of Appeal Ruling And Join Hands With Him To Rebuild Cross River State

    The Governor of Cross River State,  Senator Bassey Otu has prayed litigant – Senator Sandy Onor to accept the recent Court of Appeal ruling affirming him as the authentic winner of the March 18th Governor election.

    Governor Otu said the affirmation is a true reflection of the people’s mandate given to him in confidence.

    He prayed the aggrieved parties to sheath their sword and join hands in the People’s First Agenda.

    “The ruling of the Court of Appeal today is a welcome development and affirms that we were overwhelmingly voted in by the people on March 18, 2023.

    “This ruling should bring an end to litigation on the outcome of the governorship election. For those in the opposition, especially my brother, Prof. Sandy Onor, I once again offer you a hand of friendship. Come and join my administration so that together we can move our state forward and bring about the dividends of democracy.”

    Otu reiterated that his administration will not segregate irrespective of tribe, gender, and age, adding that a level playing ground will be given to all and sundry to showcase their prowess.

    “My administration is fully re-energized to deliver on the People First Mandate, which is on track to repositioning our State for effective and responsive governance. I solicit the support and patience of all Cross Riverians as we navigate the challenging times toward the Cross River of our dreams.

    “Let me reassure all our citizens that we are working round the clock to ensure that we deliver the best governance for our people. It is important also to note that preparations are in top gear for a robust and successful Calabar festival, while we continue to address other socio-economic and developmental issues.”

    Recall that on Wednesday, the Court of Appeal sitting in Lagos affirmed the decision of the Election Petition Tribunal of September 26 upholding the election of Governor Bassey Otu and his deputy, Rt. Hon. Peter Odey as duly elected.

  • Sandy Heads To Supreme Court As Court Of Appeal Upholds Otu’s Victory

    Sandy Heads To Supreme Court As Court Of Appeal Upholds Otu’s Victory

    Elijah Ugani

    The Court of Appeal sitting in Lagos on Wednesday, November 22, has upheld the ruling of Tribunal by declaring Governor Bassey Otu as the winner of the March 16 governorship election.

    The Appeal had dismissed the Appeal by Sen Sandy Onor and PDP against Prince Bassey Otu as lacking in meirt.

    The governorship tribunal had earlier dismissed the petition by Sen Sandy Onor and PDP brought before it against Prince Bassey Otu and APC.

    The tribunal had held that the matter before it was a pre-election matter.

    Reacting to the judgement of the Court of Appeal, the Director General of Caterpillar Movement, Chief Joe Obi Bisong, in release he personally signed and sighted by Theluminenews, said that the judgement did not represent the full conviction of the processes that led to the election and they will seek further legal opinion on the next steps.

    The release reads in parts, “The judgement does not reflect the full conviction of our position on the processes leading to the leading to the election.

    We shall seek further legal opinion on the next possible steps.

    “We urge all our teeming supporters to remain calm and go about their legitimate businesses.

    “We are confident that justice shall surely be ultimately done.”

  • Protest Rocks Kano Over Appeal Court Judgement As Angry Youths Blocks Major High Ways

    Protest Rocks Kano Over Appeal Court Judgement As Angry Youths Blocks Major High Ways

    Channels Television 

    A protest has erupted in Kano state over the recent Appeal court judgment in the governorship election.

    Some group of youths whom seemed to be sympathetic with the former governor took the streets to protest the Court of Appeal judgement.

    The police managed to disperse the protesters along the Dan Agundi area of the state.

    This is coming after the Certified True Copy of the judgement appeared in the public domain.

  • PDP’s Electoral Debacle In Plateau State: A Case Of Violent Non-fit Injuria BY OKOI OBONO-OBLA

    PDP’s Electoral Debacle In Plateau State: A Case Of Violent Non-fit Injuria BY OKOI OBONO-OBLA

     

    It is funny that Nigerian political parties don’t learn from precedents that the courts have laid down; on how they should manage and administer their affairs with decorum orderliness and in
    accordance with the dictates of the rule of law and due process.

    Why would the PDP brazenly disobey a court order issued by the High Court restraining a Caretaker Committee (which the court has declared illegal) from conducting primaries to nominate its candidates for the general election?

    The law is that a court order must be obeyed no matter how you feel about it.

    A court order stands till it is set aside by the court that issued or or an appellate court.

    The law also says that if a party disobeys a court order the court should shut its door against that party.

    The Consequences of the Refusal or Failure or Neglect of the PDP to obey a Court order that its Caretaker Committee should not conduct Primaries to nominate its candidates is what is responsible for the debacle that played out in Plateau State.

    You would recall that in 2019 the same scenario was enacted in Zamfara State when APC lost all its elected positions because the Party broke into two irreconcilable factions namely Abdul Aziz Yari and Senator Kabiru Marafa Factions.

    These two factions presented two lists of candidates to INEC and INEC became confused and consequently refused to accept the list from these two facts.

    The Abdul Aziz Yari faction had held its primary election.

    Subsequently, it was presented to the National Headquarters of APC a list of candidates elected from the primaries conducted but was refused.

    The Abdul Aziz faction forwarded the list to INEC which accepted it but refused to process it.

    INEC then used the sledgehammer on APC and banned APC from fielding a list of the names of its candidates for failure to comply with the deadlines stipulated by the Electoral Act.

    What ensued was the filing of different lawsuits by the two irrevocable factions of Zamfara State in different courts in a fight to finish posturing.

    The Abdul Aziz Yari faction filed an action at the Zamfara High Court challenging the decision of INEC to refuse the list of candidates submitted and the banning of the Party from participating in the general election.

    On the other, Senator Kabiru Marafa’s faction approached the Federal High Court to challenge the validity of the primaries conducted by the Abdul Aziz Yari faction.

    On 29 January 2019, the Zamfara High Court and the Federal High Court delivered their judgments.

    The Federal High Court held that the APC did not conduct a valid primary election.

    It ordered INEC not to accept the list of names submitted by INEC for the 2019 general elections.

    On the other hand, the Zamfara State High Court held that the primaries conducted by the Abdul Aziz Yari faction were valid and ordered INEC to accept the list of names submitted by it to enable it to participate in the 2019 general elections.

    Both parties filed appeal and counter-appeal concerning the two judgments delivered by the Federal High Court and Zamfara High Court respectively.

    On 21 February 2029, the Court of Appeal Abuja delivered its judgment and ordered INEC to accept the list of candidates presented by Abdul Aziz Yari’s faction.
    INEC complied with the Order issued by the Court of Appeal Abuja and allowed APC to participate in the general elections.

    This led to the emergence of Idris as the APC governorship candidate to face Bello Mutawalle of the PDP.

    Senator Kabiru Marafa’s faction of APC continued with its case at the Court of Appeal Sokoto.

    On 19 March 2019, the Court of Appeal Sokoto delivered its judgment nullifying the primaries conducted by Abdul Aziz Yari’s faction of APC.

    It also declared that all the election results won by candidates produced by the Abdul Aziz Yari faction in the 2019 general elections were invalid.

    The APC national headquarters in a panicky move filed an appeal in the Supreme Court seeking recognition of the judgment of the Zamfara State High Court in favour of the Abdul Aziz Yari faction.

    The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and held that the Primaries conducted by the APC Zamfara State were void.

    The Supreme Court further held the primaries conducted by the Abdul Aziz faction of APC Zamfara State were held in violation of the APC Constitution, the Electoral Act and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.

    The Supreme Court held that all the votes cast by the electorate in Zamfara State for the Governorship, National and State Assemblies were wasted votes.

    The Supreme Court ordered that all the candidates presented by the Party that took second position in the general elections and met the required constitutional spread should be declared the winner.

    Consequently, INEC declared PDP candidates as the winner of the general election in Zamafara State and proceeded to issue certificates of recognition to them.

    This is how APC lost Xamfara State in the 2019 general elections.

    One would have thought the ugly and sad experience suffered by APC in 2019 would guide PDP when the confusion and lawlessness engulfed its Plateau State chapter in 2023.
    In this case who is to take the blame?
    Volenti non-fit injuria(to a willing person, it is not wrong).
    @ Okoi Obono-Obla

    Disclaimer: The opinion expressed in this article is strictly that of the author, Okoi Obono-Obla and does not represent TheLumineNews or its agent 

  • Panic In APC As Court Of Appeal Delivers Judgement On Sandy Vs Otu Tomorrow

    Panic In APC As Court Of Appeal Delivers Judgement On Sandy Vs Otu Tomorrow

    By Thelumine Admin

    There seemed to be mix feelings among members of the ruling All Progressive Party APC, in Cross River State as the Court Appeal set to deliver judgement on the appeal brought before by Sen Sandy Onor and the PDP against Prince Bassey Otu and APC.

    Some of the stakeholders of the APC who spoke to TheLumineNews on condition of anonymity, maintained that there are a lot of lapses on Prince Otu’s administration as they alleged that his wife is more in charge of governance.

    There regretted their initial insinuations that Prince Otu was going to depart from the era where the former governor’s younger brother was running the administration of the state, but that they have entered another one chance where a woman is put in charge of the administration of the state.

    There are of the opinion that Sen Sandy Onor is more prepared for governance, and that however the judgement goes, they don’t have much to loose, as Prince Otu is not ready to look anybody’s face.

    Their fears is premised on the fact that most of the recent judgements delivered by the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, has a semblance with the case between Sen Sandy Onor against Prince Bassey Otu.

    Their worries is that if the Lagos division of the Court of Appeal, takes a cue from that of Abuja Division, it therefore means that the matter will be determined on its merit other than being dismissed as it was done by the tribunal.

    Another APC stalwart who just identified himself as Asuquo, expressed confidence that Prince Otu will win the case as it appears that most of the governorship appeals are favorable to the APC, that Prince Otu case will not be different.

  • Why The Court Of Appeal Is Right To Declare Dr Nentawe Goshwe As The Winner Of The Plateau Syste Governorship Election BY OKOI OBONO-OBLA

    Why The Court Of Appeal Is Right To Declare Dr Nentawe Goshwe As The Winner Of The Plateau Syste Governorship Election BY OKOI OBONO-OBLA

     

    I was reading a post and reactions on Facebook to a story written by Daily Trust Newspaper online concerning the judgment of the Court of Appeal Abuja in the Plateau State Gubernatorial tussle between Dr Nentawe Goshwe of the APC and Mutfwang of the PDP delivered on 19 November 2023; which declared Dr Nentawe Goshwe as the winner of the plateau State governorship election held on 25 March 2023.

    I felt despondent about the castigation of the judiciary by those who do not understand a whiff of the mechanics and intricacies of how the law works.

    Almost 80 % of the commentators were heaping insults and invectives on how the judiciary has been compromised.

    They were suggesting that the judgment was wrong because the Supreme Court had ruled that the nomination of candidates is a pre-election matter; and that the election tribunal does not have jurisdiction to entertain.

    They wondered therefore why the case of the case of Governor Caleb Mutfwang was an exception.

    I, therefore have undertaken the responsibility of writing this essay to demonstrate to the reading public the differences between the cases of Dr.
    Nentawe Goshwe and Mutwang; and Peter Obi, Labour Party, Atiku Abubakar & PDP against INEC, President Bola Tinubu; Senator Kashim Shettima, and APC.

    In Caleb Mutfwang’s case, the PDP in Plateau State was enmeshed in a factional and leadership crisis that culminated in a High Court action by one of the factions.

    The High Court issued an order restraining the caretaker committee set up by PDP in Plateau State y from conducting primaries to nominate candidates for all elective offices including the governorship.

    Caleb Mutfwang belonged to a faction of the PDP which the caretaker committee was disposed to.
    However, PDP violated the court order that a valid congress be conducted in the 17 local government areas of the State, by conducting congress in only five local government areas of Plateau State.

    In law, the plaintiff claims that the court will look to ascertain whether or not it has jurisdiction.

    When Dr. Nentawe Goshwe crunched his reliefs in his petition his lawyers crafted them creatively to confer jurisdiction on the election tribunal.

    Dr. Goshwe premised his case on Caleb Mutfwang and PDP breached section 177 of the Constitution.

    Section 177 (1) (a) (b)(c) & (d) of the Constitution provides as follows:

    A person shall be qualified for election to the office of Governor of a State if:

    (a) he is a citizen of Nigeria by birth;

    (b) he has attained the age of thirty-five years;

    (c) he is a member of a political party and is sponsored by that political party; and

    (d) he has been educated up to at least a School Certificate level or its equivalent.

    In the case of Caleb Mutgwang, the Petitioners (Dr. Nentawe and APC) grounded their petition on section 177(1) (d) of the Constitution which stipulates that a person shall not be qualified to be Governor of a State unless he is a member of a political party and is sponsored by a political party.

    It is glaring that Caleb Mutfwang was not sponsored by a political party because the primaries that produced the candidate of PDP were conducted by an illegal caretaker committee which the court had restrained but in flagrant disobedience of the court order went ahead to conduct.

    APC and its candidate Dr. Nentawe Goshwe also anchored their petition on section 134, subsection (1)(a)(b)(c)& (d) of the Electoral Act 2022.

    Section 134, subsection (1)(a)(b)(c)& (d) of the Electoral Act 2022 provides that an election may be questioned on any of the following grounds :

    (a) a person whose election was questioned at that time of the election is not qualified to contest the election ;

    (b) the election was invalid because of corrupt practices or noncompliance with the provisions of the Act or

    (c) the respondent was not elected by a majority of lawful votes cast at the election.

    Therefore the construction of section 177 (1) (a) (b) (c) of the 1999 constitution and section 134 (1) (a) of the Electoral Act 2022 confers jurisdiction on the Election Tribunal to hand a petition that contains an admixture of pre-election and post-election as in the Petition filed by APC and Dr Nentawe Goshwe.
    The Court of Appeal was therefore right to so hold.

    In Peter Obi, Labour Party, Atiku Abubakar & PDP against INEC, President Bola Tinubu, Senator Kashim Shettima, and APC, it was the nomination of Senator Kashim Shettima, the vice presidential candidate of the APC that was challenged by the Petitioners.

    The petitioners in their petition have challenged the nomination of Senator Shettima because he was already a senatorial candidate at the time he was nominated by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to be his vice presidential running mate.

    The Supreme Court held that Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar have no locus standing to challenge the nomination of Senator Shettima because they are not members of the APC.

    The Supreme Court also held in the circumstances of that case, nomination was a pre-election matter that the Petitioners could not incorporate in a post-election litigation.

    In light of the above, it is clear that the facts and circumstances of Peter Obi, Labour Party, Atiku Abubakar & PDP against INEC, President Bola Tinubu, Senator Kashim Shettima, and APC on one hand and INEC, APC & Dr Nentawe Goshwe and Caleb Mutfwang and PDP are diametrical not the same.

    When the facts and circumstances of two cases are dissimilar the principle of stare decisis( which means in Latin stand by things decided) (judicial precedent) cannot be applicable.

    When a court faces a legal argument, if a previous court has ruled on the same or a closely related issue, then the court will make its decision in alignment with the previous court’s decision.

    I, therefore urge lay people who don’t know a scintilla of thing about law to spare us their jaundiced interpretation of court judgments and desist from painting the judiciary in bad light.
    They should also know that emotion and sentiments have no place in judicial deliberations.

    This is why Lady Justice is blind while holding the sword in her left hand and the scale in her right hand ready to deal with anybody with ill will or affection that is brought before her.

    @ Okoi Obono-Obla

    Disclaimer: The opinion expressed in this article is strictly that of the author, Okoi Obono-Obla and does not represent TheLumineNews or its agent.

  • Shehu Sani Condemns Appeal Court Verdict Against The Electoral Victory Of Plateau State Governor

    Shehu Sani Condemns Appeal Court Verdict Against The Electoral Victory Of Plateau State Governor

    Shehu Sani, former Kaduna State Senator, has reacted to the outcome of the Appeal Court verdict, which sacked Caleb Mutfwang as the governor of Plateau State.

    Senator Sani, who posted this on his verified X account, said the appellate court decision is a broad daylight heist of the will of the people, adding that the bench is becoming the coffin of democracy.

    He wrote: “The Court of Appeal Judgement against the electoral victory of the Plateau State Governor is unfortunate, unacceptable, and condemnable. A broad daylight heist of the will of the people.The bench is becoming the coffin of democracy.”

  • Appeal Court Sacks Plateau Governor Caleb Mutfwang, Declares APC Candidate Winner

    Appeal Court Sacks Plateau Governor Caleb Mutfwang, Declares APC Candidate Winner

    A three-member panel, of the Court of Appeal in a unanimous decision on Sunday, held that Muftwang was not validly sponsored by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as provided by Section 285(2) of the Nigerian Constitution.

    The court declared Nentanwe Yilwatda Goshwe of the APC as duly elected governor of Plateau State.

    A three-member panel, in a unanimous decision on Sunday, held that Muftwang was not validly sponsored by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as provided by Section 285(2) of the Nigerian Constitution.

     

  • No Conflicts In The Decisions Of The Court Of Appeal In Peter Obi & Labour Party Against INEC, President Tinubu And Two Others; And Kabir Yusuf & NNPP Against APC BY OKOI OBONO-OBLA 

    No Conflicts In The Decisions Of The Court Of Appeal In Peter Obi & Labour Party Against INEC, President Tinubu And Two Others; And Kabir Yusuf & NNPP Against APC BY OKOI OBONO-OBLA 

     

    The Court of Appeal Abuja on 17 November 2023 delivered judgment in the appeal filed by the Governor of Kano State, Engr. Kabir Yusuf against the Judgment of the Kano Governorship Election Petition Tribunal dated 25 September 2023 that had nullified his election as Governor of Kano State.

    The Court of Appeal affirmed the Judgment of the Tribunal and ordered that Governor Kabir Yusuf vacant his gubernatorial seat for the APC candidate, Gamuwa to take over.

    One aspect of the judgment of the Court of Appeal that has attracted the attention of pundits is the part where the Court of Appeal, held that Governor Kabir Yusuf was not properly sponsored by his party-NNPP.

    Expectedly pundits have wondered why this should be so, given that the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal(PEPT) in the consolidated petitions of Peter Obi & Labour Party against INEC, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu; Senator Kashim Shettima, and APC, had held that it had no jurisdiction to adjudicate on membership of a political party raised by President Tinubu against Peter Obi.

    It goes without saying if that is the position; why would the Court of Appeal in Kabir Yusuf NNPP against APC decide otherwise?

    The position of the law is that where a superior court has decided on a matter; the court on the lower rung of the judicial hierarchy is bound to apply that principle enunciated by the superior court, where the facts of the previous case are similar to the facts and circumstances of the instance case.

    This doctrine is known as judicial precedent and, is one of the hallmarks of the common law tradition which holds sway in the Nigerian legal system.

    However, for judicial precedent to apply the facts of a previous case must be similar to the facts of the new case.

    The pertinent question therefore is:are the facts in Peter Obi & Labour Party against INEC, President Tinubu, Senator Shettima & APC on one hand ;
    and APC vs, INEC, Kabir Yusuf & NNPP on the other hand, are similar?

    The answer is No.

    In the case of Peter Obi& Labour Party and INEC, President Tinubu; Senator Shettima, and APC (the Respondents), took a preliminary objection on the locus standi of Peter Obi to bring his Petition on the ground that he contravened section 77(3) of the Electoral Act.
    Section 77 (3) of the Electoral Act mandates a political party to submit the membership register of its members 30 days before the Party primaries.
    The INEC, President Tinubu, Senator Shettima, and APC
    had argued that Peter Obi was not a member of the Labour Party but PDP.
    They contended further that Peter Obi had resigned from his membership of the PDP only on 25 May 2022 to join the Labour Party on 27 May 2022.

    On the other hand, in Kabir Yusuf & NNPP against APC; the Petitioner (APC) had filed a petition against Kabir Yusuf seeking a determination that the 3rd Respondent(NNPP) failed to sponsor a candidate who satisfied the requirements of sections 177 and 182 of the Constitution, Electoral Act 2022, and other Electoral Laws, for the election of the Governor of Kano State.

    Therefore, the facts, of the cases of the Respondents (INEC, President Tinubu; Senator Shettima, and APC) and Peter Obi are fundamentally different from the facts and circumstances in Kabir Yusuf & NNPP against APC.

    In Peter Obi’s case, the Respondents challenged the locus standi of the petitioners to bring the petitioner on the ground that Peter Obi violated section 77 (3) of the Electoral Act,2022 but they were overruled. The PEPT held it did not have jurisdiction because membership of a political party is a political question that cannot be determined by a court.

    On the other hand, in Kabir Yusuf & NNPP against APC; the Petitioner(APC) sought a determination that the 3rd Respondent(NNPP) failed to sponsor any candidate who satisfied the requirements of sections 177 and 182 of the Constitution, Electoral Act 2022, and other Electoral Laws, for the election of the Governor of Kano State.

    The facts of the two cases are therefore different and the precedent enunciated in the judgment in Peter Obi’s case is not Kabir Yusuf & NNPP against APC.

    The facts and circumstances of these two cases (Peter Obi against INEC, President Tinubu, Senator Shettima & APC), and Kabir Yusuf & NNPP and APC are distinguishable.

    It is worth noting that in the case of INEC; President Tinubu; Senator Shettima and APC did not appeal against the dismissal of their objection on the competence of Peter Obi’s Petition by the PEPT to the Supreme Court.

    Therefore since there was no appeal against that decision by the PEPT, it stands in law.

    However, it is instructive that the PEPT is also a panel of the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

    The judgment in Kabir Yusuf & NNPP was also delivered by another panel of the Court of Appeal Abuja.

    Is there any conflict between the judgment of the PEPT on one hand; and the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Kabir Yusuf & NNPP against APC?

    I do not think so.
    The judgment of the PEPT in Peter Obi & Labour Party against INEC, President Tinubu, Senator Shettima, and APC was premised on the interpretation of section 77 (3) of the Electoral Act,2022.
    The import of section 77 (3) of the Electoral Act on the main is that a political party must transmit to INEC the register of its membership 30 days before holding its convention or congress to nominate its candidates for the general election.

    Conversely, the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Kabir Yusuf & NNPP against APC is anchored on the interpretation of sections 177 and 182 of the Constitution,1999 (as amended) which provides that a candidate for governorship election must be a member of a political party that sponsors his elections.

    @ Okoi Obono-Obla

    Disclaimer: The opinion expressed in this article is clearly that of the author, Okoi Obono-Obla, and does not represent TheLumineNews or its agent.

  • Sacked Kano Governor A ba Yusuf Vows To Reclaim Mandate l, Proceeds To Supreme Court

    Sacked Kano Governor A ba Yusuf Vows To Reclaim Mandate l, Proceeds To Supreme Court

    By Jack Clifford 

    Kano State Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf has mandated his legal team to proceed to the Supreme Court, assuring the people of the state that his mandate would be restored at the apex court.

    In a recorded broadcast to the people of the state, Friday night, Abba who was sacked by the Court of Appeal in Abuja earlier in the day, implored the people of the state to remain calm and prayerful. In the meantime, the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the state, Nasiru Gwanna Yusuf, has described the judgement of the Appeal Court as a vindication of the truth.

    In a statement, Nasiru, who has been adjudged the winner of the polls by the election petition tribunal and the Appeal Court, stressed that, “The affirmation of the truth by the appeal court will surely strengthen the democracy.”

    He gave praises to Allah for his victory and commended the courts for ensuring that justice prevailed. “Both the judgments have reaffirmed that the judiciary is the last hope of the common man” he stated.

    This is a victory for all the residents and citizens of the State, therefore I am seeking for the support of everyone irrespective of party affiliation to join hands with me and my running-mate Murtala Sule Garo in the advancement of Kano,” he stated. (Text, excluding headline: Saturday Sun)