Tag: #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 

 

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.