The Court of Appeal has upheld the nomination of Biobarakuma Degi-Eremienyo as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) for Bayelsa East Senatorial District in next year’s general election.
Degi-Eremienyo was the deputy governorship candidate of the APC in the election held in Bayelsa State on November 16, 2019.
Although the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared him and the governorship candidate, David Lyon, winners of the election, the Supreme Court in a judgment on February 13, 2020 (a day to their inauguration) voided their election on the grounds that Degi-Eremienyo was not qualified for the election.
A five-man panel of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Mary Odili, held among others that Degi-Eremienyo presented false information to INEC, in aid of his qualification for the election, in view of the unexplained discrepancies in the names in his academic credentials.
But the Court of Appeal, in its latest judgment, cleared Degi-Eremienyo to contest the next election as the candidate of the APC in Bayelsa East Senatorial District and held that the Supreme Court’s judgment of 2020 no longer applies.
In the judgment given on November 4 by the Port-Harcourt division of the Court of Appeal, a certified true copy (CTC) of which The Nation sighted in Abuja yesterday, a three-member panel was unanimous that Degi-Eremienyo had effectively corrected the discrepancies in the names in his academic credentials.
Justice Joseph Ikyegh, in the lead judgment, found that having made a deep poll, which was published in the official gazette, in line with the Supreme Court’s judgment, the discrepancies in the names shown in Degi-Eremienyo’s academic credentials have been effectively regularised.
Justice Ikyegh agreed with Degi-Eremienyo’s lawyer, O. S. Kehinde that in the absence of any specific order in the Supreme Court judgment barring him (Degi-Eremienyo) from further contesting elections or holding any public office, he was eligible to contest the next general election, having been lawfully nominated and cleared by INEC.
The judge said: “The Supreme Court, in the case of P.D.P. v Degi-Eremienyo, held that only a deed poll will cure the 11 multiple names in the educational certificates of the 1st respondent in that case, who is also the 1st respondent in the present dispute, without deciding that an order of injunction be issued against the 1st respondent for the unexplained multiple names and from contesting any subsequent election, or that the 1st respondent was barred from contesting future election on that account.”
The judgment was on an appeal marked: CA/PH/450/2022 filed by Sodaguwo Adegadiza Festus-Omoni, with Degi-Eremienyo, the APC and INEC listed as respondents.
The appeal was against an earlier judgment by the Bayelsa division of the Federal High Court, which affirmed Degi-Eremienyo’s nomination and dismissed the suit by Festus-Omoni.
Justice Ikyegh, while affirming the earlier judgment of the Federal High Court, said: “I am satisfied that the deed poll attached to the counter affidavit of the 1st respondent is indeed and does represent a deed poll contemplated and recognised by law as it corrected and confirmed the name in the three educational credentials or documents to belong to the 1st respondent, which the 1st respondent submitted to the 3rd respondent (INEC) through the 2nd respondent (APC) in tandem with part of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of PDP v. Degi Eremienyo (2021) 9 NWlR (Pt.1781) 274 on deed poll and official gazette.
Other members of the panel – Justices Ridwan Abdullahi and Abdulazeez Waziri – agreed with the lead judgment.
“The deed poll and the official gazette, therefore, confirmed that the name of the 1st respondent is Biobarakuma Wangagha Degi Eremienyo and concluded that all documents with any of these names remain valid and that the public should take note.
“There was thus, a deed poll that put the records straight in respect of the educational documents in question belonging to the 1st respondent; more so, the 1st respondent’s deed poll was published in the official gazette, which gave sufficient notice to the public in that regard, since May 2022.
“The Supreme Court held in the case of PDP v Degl-Eremienyo, at page 290 that it is only the authorities that issued certificates that can effectively change the names appearing thereon, that an affidavit of change, correction and confirmation of name has to be by deed poll; and that since the procedure necessarily affects official record and archives of the nation, the deed poll must be published in the official gazette which was followed In this case.
“I think in that wise, that the major aspect of the decision of the Supreme Court in PDP v Degi-Eremienyo, which required a deed poll published in the official gazette in respect of the name of the 1st respondent in the educational documents in issue was complied with by the 1st respondent in this case.
“The deed poll and the official gazette therefore confirmed the names in the educational certificates the 1st respondent submitted to the 3rd respondent through the 2nd respondent, the subject matter of the present dispute, as both the deed poll and the official gazette had published, it conveyed the three objectives of either to correct or change or confirm the name.
“The lower court was accordingly, right to hold that the deed poll and the official gazette regularised the multiple names in the educational certificates spotlighted in the case of PDP v Degi Elemienyo submitted to the 3rd respondent, as the said finding is supported by the evidence in the record, particularly the deep poll and the official gazette.
“Viewed from another angle, it is not the case of the appellant that someone has come forward to claim the same name contained in the said academic documents,” he said.
On whether INEC was right to have cleared Degi-Eremienyo to contest as APC candidate for Bayelsa East Senatorial District, Justice Ikyegh said: “There is the presumption under Section 168(1) of the Evidence Act to the effect that when any judicial or official act is shown to have been done in a manner substantially regular, it is presumed that formal requisites for its validity were complied with.
“The appellant did not rebut the presumption. The 3rd respondent is, accordingly, taken to have acted properly, regularly and validly in the educational credentials or documents supported by the deed poll and the official gazette to clear the 1st respondent to contest the coming election for the senatorial seat in question, in my modest view.
“In my modest opinion, the lower court arrived at the right decision in the instant case. In conclusion, I find no substance in the appeal and hereby dismiss it and affirm the judgment of the lower court,” Ikyegh said.