The Nation Newspaper

Tag: upholds

  • Election tribunal upholds Ekiti Governor Fayemi’s victory

    The Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Abuja, the nation’s capital, yesterday upheld the victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate in the July 14, 2018 election, Dr Kayode Fayemi.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Prof. Kolapo Olusola, challenged the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of Fayemi as winner of the poll and lost.

    APC members trooped out in their thousands on the streets of Ado-Ekiti, the state capital, dancing from Odo Ado to the Government House.

    They ended their procession at the party’s secretariat in Ajilosun.

    In its judgment delivered by Justice Suleiman Belgore, the tribunal said Fayemi was validly elected, contrary to the position of the PDP and Olusola.

    Fayemi polled 197,459 voted to defeat Olusola, who got 178,022 votes to become the runner-up.

    The tribunal began sitting in Ekiti last August before it relocated to Abuja, citing reasons of insecurity in the state.

    The APC members, who started their jubilation from Odo Ado, were led by a House of Representatives candidate in Ekiti Central Federal Constituency I, Sola Fatoba, and the Senior Special Assistant (SSA) to the Governor on Mobilisation, Tunji Ogunlola.

    Ogunlola, who addressed the crowd, said Fayemi worked hard to win the election and that the judgment confirmed the position of the party.

    The party supporters danced to the music supplied by a popular musician in Ekiti State.

    The long convoy of vehicles caused traffic congestion on Ado-Ikere-Akure road.

    The APC in the state had described the victory as expected, saying the party perpetrated no electoral fraud in the election to warrant the nullification and upturn its outcome.

    The state’s APC Deputy Chairman Sola Elesin said: “We are happy over the outcome of the election, but we are not in any way surprised. This is because a transparent election was held on July 14, last year. It was clear that Governor Fayemi won fair and square.

    Read also: JAMB suspends UNIBEN CBT centre, eight others

    “So, we are not afraid, even if they want to appeal the judgment. We are ready for them because we have no skeleton in our cupboard. There were no cases of electoral malpractices.”

    On the allegation that the shake-up in the Judiciary concerning the suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, was part of the alleged plot by APC to win at the tribunal, Elesin said: “They only wanted to damage the reputation of the Judiciary.

    “We had won two litigations since Fayemi came on board. He was taken to the court on his eligibility to contest the APC governorship primary and he won. He was taken to the Election Petitions Tribunal and he also came out victorious.

    “We will continue to win because we have no skeleton in our cupboard.”

    But Olusola said the PDP would appeal the judgment.

    The former deputy governor, who spoke through the erstwhile Director of Media of his campaign organisation, Lere Olayinka, said: “That is not the last bus stop as regards the Election Petitions Tribunal.

    “The law is very clear regarding the hierarchies of courts we can approach to seek redress on this issue. We are surely going to appeal the judgment.”

    Also, Ekiti State Deputy Governor Bisi Egbeyemi said Fayemi’s victory at the tribunal would strengthen the APC in Ekiti ahead of the forthcoming elections.

    In a statement by his Special Assistant (SA) on Media, Odunayo Ogunmola, the deputy governor said: “We thank God Who gave us this victory and we thank Ekiti people who voted for us and all our supporters all over the world.

    “This will surely make us to have more friends and more supporters and victory is assured for President Muhammadu Buhari in Ekiti and other parts of Nigeria.

    “This judgment is a plus to our party; I just want to urge members of our party and teeming supporters to take it with joy and be careful when they are celebrating so as not to offend others.”

    The PDP said it will contest the verdict at the Court of Appeal.

    A statement yesterday in Abuja, the nation’s capital, by its spokesman Kola Ologbondiyan, said: “The PDP holds that the Court of Appeal will consider the matter strictly on its merit, particularly with the abounding evidence of rigging, including violence, vote-buying, ballot stuffing and alteration of results perpetuated by the APC are still intact…”

  • Court upholds Adetimehin as Ondo APC chairman

    The Ondo State High Court sitting in Akure, the state capital yesterday dismissed a suit, filed by Idowu Otetubi and Gani Muhammed, in which they are laying claim to the leadership of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the state.

    The duo, who claimed to be the authentic Chairman and Secretary of APC in the state, sued Ondo State Independent Electoral Commission (ODIEC) through their counsel, Tolu Babaleye.

    They prayed the court to direct ODIEC to recognise Idowu Otetubi as the authentic Chairman of APC in Ondo State.

    They also sought an injunction to restrain ODIEC from accepting the list of candidates for local government election from the Adetimehin-led Executive.

    Counsel to ODIEC, Charles Titiloye, listed four grounds for a preliminary objection to hear the suit.

    The lawyer prayed the court to strike out the suit, saying it was grossly incompetent and an abuse of court processes.

    Titiloye contended that the suit was an intra-party affairs and not justifiable.

    He averred that issues raised therein could only be adjudicated when complaining parties had fulfilled the condition precedent to filing of suit in court, as provided for by APC’s constitution.

    Titiloye argued that the suit was a gross abuse of court process in view of the fact that the same claimants filed similar suit on the same matter against the defendants before the Federal High Court in Abuja.

    The lawyer noted that legal representative capacity of “purported Ondo State Executive Committee of APC” was not known to law.

    He added that by the rules Ondo State High Court, actions could only be commenced by a claimant and not a plaintiff.

    The lawyer urged the court to dismiss the suit as incompetent.

    Also, counsel to APC and Adetimehin, B. A. Aderosin, urged the court to strike out the suit on the ground that the claimants lacked the locus standi to file the suit.

    Justice Bode Adegbehingbe held that the suit filed by Otetubi and Mohammed was an abuse of court process.

    He held that it constituted multiplicity of actions by the same claimants before different courts.

    Also, the APC in Ondo State yesterday hailed the court ruling.

    A statement by its Director of Media and Publicity, Steve Otaloro, said: “We salute the courage of the court justice, who has further asserted the independence of the Judiciary in Nigeria.

    “The outcome of the judgment has once again rekindled the hope of average Nigerian on the Judiciary as the last hope of the people.

    “The judgment is also good for democracy in Nigeria because APC has shown tenacity and the ability to lead Nigeria as an egalitarian society based on the rule of law.

  • Appeal Court upholds High Court’s verdict on Ondo monarch’s sack

    A Court of Appeal sitting in Akure, Ondo State capital, has ordered the Akinnuwa of Igbindo in Ondo West Local Government Area, Oba John Ogundoju, to vacate his seat.

    The embattled monarch was also asked to stop parading himself as the ruler of the community.

    An Ondo High Court, in 2015, sacked Oba Ogundoju, barely two weeks after the kingmakers presented him to the town and was given the staff of office by the government.

    Dissatisfied with his selection, some aggrieved princes from Ogbowo Okun Ruling House, led by Adetutu Ifashole and Okunade Makinde Fashole, sued Ogundoju and four others.

    The other defendants include Adeodi Adebayo and Taye Akinkugbe, as well as the Chairman of the ruling house, Adeseeke Stephen and the Secretary, Joseph Olamodimu.

    The plaintiffs sought the court’s declaration that by “the age-long custom and tradition of the ascension to the stool of Akinnuwa of Igbindo, it is the only male line of the applicable ruling house – and in this case the Ogbowo Okun ruling house – that is eligible to fill the stool anytime it is vacant”.

    Also, the plaintiffs averred that based on a White Paper on the Olayiwola Chieftaincy Review Commission of 1982, it was the turn of Ogbowo Okun ruling house to produce the next monarch.

    The plaintiffs prayed for an order of “injunction restraining the Ogundoju, the second and third defendants, from imposing Ogundoju on Ogbowo Ruling House as the Akinnuwa of Igbindo”.

    Justice Adegbehingbe held that since only sons from the male lineage could be made monarch, “Ogundoju is not eligible to contest and ascend the vacant stool of the Akinnuwa of Igbindo from the Ogbowo Ruling House, whose turn it is to fill the vacant stool, having hailed from the female line of the ruling house”.

    Besides granting the order preventing Ogundoju from parading himself as Akinnuwa, the court asked the ruling house to start a fresh selection for a new monarch.

    Oba Ogundoju, through his lawyer Kunle Adetowubo, filed an appeal challenging the judgment of Justice Bode Adegbehingbe at the High Court.

    In a three-hour judgment, Justice Mohammed Danjuma, on behalf of the panel, upheld the earlier judgment.

    He said: “On the basis of the facts and evidence adduced by parties in the case and the authorities cited, it is my finding that the decision of the learned trial court on this issue was in order. It is resolved against the appellants and in favour of respondents…”

  • Supreme Court upholds Ishaku’s election

    Supreme Court upholds Ishaku’s election

    The Supreme Court has upheld the election of Darius Dickson Ishaku of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)  as governor of Taraba State.

    The court, in a unanimous judgment by a seven-man panel, led by Justice Ibrahim Galadima, dismissed the appeal by the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Hajia Aisha Jumai Al-Hassan for lacking in merit.

    Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour, who read the lead judgment, upheld the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which affirmed Ishaku’s election.

    Al-Hassan (now Minister of Women Affairs) challenged the return of  Ishaku as winner of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) at the election tribunal on the grounds that he was not validly sponsored by his party, following his non-qualification.

    Al-Hassan won at the tribunal, which voided Ishaku’s election and ordered INEC to issue her a certificate of return. But her victory was overturned by the Court of Appeal, Abuja, a decision she appealed to the Supreme Court.

    Yesterday, the court took arguments from parties and gave its judgment around 1:30 pm, but reserved its reasons to February 22.

    Justice Rhodes-Vivour declared: “There is no merit in this appeal. The judgment of the lower court is affirmed. The election of D.D. Ishaku is upheld. I shall give reasons for this judgment on February 22, 2016.”

    The other six justices agreed with the lead judgment, the consequential orders and the promise to provide reasons for the decision at a later date.

    The court said the judgment covered six other appeals and cross appeals by parties against the judgment of the Court of Appeal on December 31, 2015.

    Parties in the appeals include Al-Hassan, APC, Ishaku, PDP and INEC.

    Earlier, lawyers to parties highlighted the issues canvassed in their briefs of argument.

    Lawyer to Al-hassan, Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN), who led Mahmud Magaji (SAN) drew a distinction between his client’s case and the two cases, in relation to the governorship disputes in Benue and Zamfara states, earlier decided by the court.

    In the cases identified as Tarzoor vs Ortom and Shinkafi vs Yari, the Supreme Court held that a non-member of a party, who also was not a candidate in the party’s primary election, lacked the locus (the legal right) to query the conduct of the primary and its outcome as it relates to qualification of the candidate.

    Owonikoko argued that his client’s case was different in the sense that his client was contesting Ishaku’s  qualification to stand for election on the grounds of his party’s non-compliance with sections 177(1) (C) of the Constitution and 87(4) of the Electoral Act.

    “In the two cases decided by this court, primaries were held and INEC confirmed that fact. But, in this case, there was no primary, which is the requirement for sponsorship/qualification to contest election to the office of a governor.

    “We are not anchoring our contest of the 1st respondent’s qualification on the propriety of the primary as required under the Electoral Act. Our case is about the constitutional qualification of the 1st respondent and improper conduct of primary,” Owonikoko said.

    He added that in this case, INEC’s officials testified and presented a report  that the PDP did not hold a valid primary as it purported to have held its governorship primary at the party’s headquarters in Abuja in the absence of INEC’s monitors, and in violation of the Electoral Act that such primaries must be held in the state capital.

    “If they had conducted a primary, we have no locus to challenge its outcome and the candidacy of the 1st respondent,” Owonikoko added and urged the court to uphold his client’s appeal.

    Ishaku’s lawyer Kanu Agabi (SAN) urged the court to dismiss the appeal by Al-Hassan. He  noted that the lower court, relying on past decisions of the Supreme Court, held that the appellants are bound by their pleadings, having averred, in some paragraphs of their petition, that the 1st respondent was a candidate of the PDP and was sponsored by the party for the election.

    Agabi also argued that there was no distinction between the case and those of SC/907/2015: Shinkafi vs Yari and Tarzoor vs Ortom.

    PDP’s lawyer Solo Akuma (SAN) stated that the 1st respondent was PDP’s candidate  and that the party had  never denied he was its candidate.

    He noted that the tribunal found that the PDP actually held a primary, but in Abuja and not at the state capital.

    “The court below also found that a primary was held and that the appellants, not being a member of the PDP lacked no locus to challenge the manner of the conduct of the primary,” Akumma said.

    He argued that the distinction being made by the appellants was irrevant “because they cannot distinguish the cases. What happened in Ortom’s case was more brazen. He was in PDP on Friday and, on Saturday he became APC’s candidate,” he added and urged the court to dismiss the appeal.

    INEC’s lawyer Joseph Daudu (SAN) also argued in a similar vein and prayed the court to dismiss the appeal by Al-Hassan.

    After listening to the lawyers, the court rose for about one and half hours. It resumed proceedings at 1:30 to announce its verdict.

     

  • Appeal Court upholds Ortom’s election

    Appeal Court upholds Ortom’s election

    The Court of Appeal, sitting in Makurdi, the Benue State capital, yesterday upheld the judgment of the Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal, which affirmed the election of Samuel Ortom as governor.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Terhemen Tarzor, had prayed the court to reverse the tribunal’s judgment and declare him winner of the April 11 election.

    He said the tribunal erred in its judgment because Ortom was not qualified to contest in the election.

    According to him, Ortom was not validly nominated by the All Progressives Congress (APC) to participate in the election.

    Tarzor urged the Appellate Court to set aside the tribunal’s judgment, which had dismissed his petition for lack of merit.

    The PDP candidate also prayed the court to direct the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to declare him winner of the poll.

    But APC said its candidate was validly nominated in conformity with the Electoral Act, 2010, adding that the onus of proof rested on the appellants.

    All the parties in the matter – APC, PDP, INEC – had filed cross-appeals and cross-appellant appeals challenging some aspects of the tribunal’s judgment.

    But in a unanimous decision, read by Justice Mohammed Garba, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of merit.

    Justice Garba said the appellants failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, in line with the legal dictum that “he who alleges must prove”.

    The judge added that the lower court was right in dismissing the petition.

    Benue State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mike Gusah, described the judgment as sound.

    The commissioner urged the opposition to join the governor to develop the state.

    But PDP’s lawyer Donald Kertyo said his team would contest the ruling at the Supreme Court.

     

     

     

  • Tribunal upholds Ikpeazu’s election

    Tribunal upholds Ikpeazu’s election

    •‘It’s victory for all’ •Mixed reactions trail victory

    The petition tribunal sitting in Umuahia, the Abia State capital, has reaffirmed the election of Governor Okezie Ikpeazu.

    Chairman of the three-man panel Justice Usman Bwala said the petitioner, Dr Alex Otti of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt, his allegations of criminality and over-voting in three local government areas of the state.

    Bwala said the petitioner’s prayer for the cancellation of results from Osisioma, Obingwa and Isiala Ngwa North councils because the returning officer cancelled them was not substantiated.

    The chairman said Otti’s plea that the election be cancelled and he be declared winner,  is contradictory, noting that the petitioner cannot ask for a cancellation and still want to be declared winner.

    Bwala said ‘’the petition failed and is hereby dismissed, and no cost will be awarded,” .

    Reacting, APGA’s National Chairman Dr Victor Oye said the judgment was long expected.

    Oye appealed to party supporters to remain calm, saying: “Since we have failed to get judgment at the tribunal in Umuahia, we will proceed to Abuja to retrieve our mandate.”

    Governor Ikpeazu described the judgment as victory for all. He thanked God and the people for their support, saying the victory would give him the impetus to fast-track development of the state.

    “There is no-victor, no-vanquished; it is a victory for all. I call on losers to join us in developing this state to an enviable height”.

    Mixed reactions have, however, trailed Ikpeazu’s victory.

    PDP faithful were jubilating as APGA’s supporters faulted the judgment.

    In Aba North and South councils, happy crowds gathered to celebrate as early as noon when the news filtered into town.

    A PDP supporter, Augustine Iroegbu, lauded the tribunal its “sound and unbiased judgment”, saying the tribunal’s pronouncement showed that “there are judges who can look at a case thoroughly and give judgment without fear or favour.”

    But a chieftain of APGA, Chief Ahamdi Emmanuel Nweke, said: “It is a rape on our democracy and an aberration of justice. If there was ever a case of justice turned offside and the blind lady representing the scale of justice being stabbed in the chest, it is this case.

    “That is no judgment; it is a continuation of money for justice syndrome. We saw it at the State and National Assembly tribunal; their decisions were a mockery of justice. We are going to appeal and there is no doubt we will recover our mandate”.

    A combined team of policemen and other security agencies paraded the streets of Aba as part of measures to prevent a breakdown of law and order.

     

     

  • Tribunal upholds lawmaker’s election

    Tribunal upholds lawmaker’s election

    •Orders rerun at Umunneochi 

    The election petition tribunal in Abia State has upheld the election of Chinedum Enyinnaya Orji of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as the representative of Umuahia Central at the House of Assembly.

    Orji’s election was challenged by Sidney Onyemere of the All Progressives Congress (APC), citing electoral malpractices and fraud.

    The Justice Adeniyi Onigbanjo-led tribunal said the petitioner failed to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt.

    Justice Onigbanjo faulted the petition, which asked the tribunal to declare the respondent winner instead of himself and failed to state correctly, the name of the constituency he was seeking to represent.

    He said the petitioner wrote to the tribunal after two months to amend part of the petition instead of the stipulated 21 days, noting that allowing the petitioner to amend his petition would amount to accepting a new petition, which is against the Electoral Act (2000), as amended.

    Onigbanjo said: “The petitioner said Umuahia Urban state constituency on one hand and Umuahia Urban/Central state constituency in another instance, thereby confusing the tribunal.

    “We observed that there is no such constituency captured in the state. Therefore, the constituency he is seeking to represent does not exist”.

    Reacting, Onyemere said he was not satisfied with the ruling.

    The tribunal also ordered a rerun in two wards in Umunneochi council following the petition by Chima Mgbeke of the PDP against Prince Ikedi Ezekwesili of APGA.

    The tribunal said the results were not collated and  could change the result if they were.

    Reacting to the judgment, Prince Ezekwesili said he was sure of winning the rerun even if it was conducted 20 times.

    He said he would consult his lawyers before deciding whether to appeal or not.

     

     

  • Tribunal upholds Umahi’s election

    The Governorship Election Tribunal sitting in Abakaliki, Ebonyi State capital, on Friday upheld the election of Governor David Umahi of the People’s Democratic Party,(PDP) as the winner of the governorship election held in the state on April 11, 2015.

    In an eight-hour judgment, the tribunal, in its ruling, held that the petitioner failed to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt and consequently dismissed the petition for lacking in merit.

    The candidate of Labour Party (LP) in the election, Dr Edward Nkwegu, had approached the tribunal to seek the nullification of the victory of Umahi on the ground that the election was marred by irregularities and substantial non-compliance with the provisions of electoral act and provisions of the constitutions of the federal republic of Nigeria.

    The petitioner also contended that the election was marred by corrupt practices and that the first Respondent (David Umahi) did not score the majority of the lawful votes cast, which he said were enough ground to nullify the election.

    The three-man panel, headed by Theresa Egoche,  began by striking out paragraphs containing allegations against named and unnamed persons who were not parties contained in the petition on the grounds that they are vague, imprecise and lacking in simplicity in line with objections of the counsels to the Respondents.

    The panel also rejected INEC election guidelines for the governorship election tendered as evidence by the petitioner on the ground that it was not part of the list of evidences  sought to be tendered in the petition by the petitioner.

    Also, the tribunal held that the electoral guidelines were mere instructions and have no force of law against the offenders/defaulters, and as such cannot be a ground to challenge an election.

    She noted that a breach in the electoral guideline as alleged by the petitioner cannot be a ground to nullify the election.

    On the usefulness of the evidences tendered by the Expert witness called by the petitioner, the tribunal held that it never asked for any expert analysis to be able to consider whether there was over voting or not in the said election, and for that reason, cannot use such evidences in the analysis of expert witness as grounds to determine the petition.

    The panel also ruled that the petitioner failed to tie evidences dumped before the tribunal to his claims, noting that a judge is an adjudicator and not an investigator.

    It observed that the petitioner’s witnesses, in the process of cross examination, discredited the evidences earlier tendered by the petitioner before the tribunal.

    She said: “The inability of the petitioner to call witnesses who were present during the election to prove his claim, that the results shown through the card-readers evidence were the authentic, makes his claim doubtful and cannot be relied upon by the tribunal.

    It also held that the petitioner, who is alleging over-voting, did not tender any result sheet showing that votes were illegally allocated or awarded to the first Respondent.

    “We cannot see the evidence of non compliance to the electoral act or guidelines in the evidences given by petitioner’s witnesses”.

    “The petitioner, having failed to show evidences showing that he scored the highest number of votes, proves that the first respondent was dully elected,” the tribunal said.

    Counsel to the petitioner, A.I Akaraiwe, thanked the panel and urged them to make the copies of the judgment available to concerned parties as soon as possible.

    Counsels to Chief Umahi, Chief Arthur Obi Okafor SAN ; PDP, Chief J.U.K Igwe SAN and INEC, E.S Nriezedi, commended the tribunal for the judgment.

    Reacting to the judgment, Governor Dave Umahi said he had relied on God throughout the period of the petition, and reiterated the readiness of his administration to fight corruption in the state.

  • Tribunal upholds Ortom’s election

    Tribunal upholds Ortom’s election

    •Dismisses Tarzoor’s petition

    The Benue State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal in Makurdi yesterday upheld the election of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Governor Samuel Ortom.

    It dismissed the petition by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) standard-bearer, Terhemen Tarzoor, for lacking in merit.

    Justice Elizabeth Karatu, who read the three-hour judgment, said the petitioner failed to prove that Governor Ortom was not qualified to stand election.

    She said the respondent had proved that he was an APC member by tendering his membership card and his letter of waiver at the tribunal.

    Ortom urged Tarzoor to join him in building a new Benue, which everyone would be proud of.

    Addressing reporters after the judgment, he said his election was God’s will, adding that he nursed the ambition to rule the state for more than 20 years.

    There was jubilation in Makurdi and other parts of the state. APC supporters took to the streets, dancing.

    An APC chieftain, Chief John Akperashi, who led supporters in a motorcade through Judges Quarters, Gboko Road, Northbank, Wadadta and Highlevel in Makurdi, told The Nation that the governor had come to stay, “as he will now work without distraction.”

    The Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mike Gusah, described the judgment as sound.

    He advised the opposition to support Ortom and move Benue forward.

     

  • Supreme Court upholds Ibrahim’s appointment as Ohinoyi of Ebiraland

    Supreme Court upholds Ibrahim’s appointment as Ohinoyi of Ebiraland

    The Supreme Court yesterday put an end to the 18-year old dispute over the appointment of Ado Ibrahim as the Ohinoyi of Ebiraland in Kogi State.

    The court, in a unanimous judgment, upheld Ibrahim’s appointment as the paramount ruler of Ebiraland on June 2, 1997 by the then Military Administrator of the state, Colonel Bzigu Afakirya.

    The Supreme Court, in a lead judgment delivered by Justice John Okoro, upheld Ibrahim’s argument that the Kogi High Court and the Court of Appeal, Jos were without jurisdiction when they heard the cases and gave judgments in favour of those opposed to the choice of Ibrahim. The court upheld Ibrahim’s appeal and set aside the concurrent judgments by the High Court and the Court of Appeal.

    Some Ebira indigenes led by Maigida Lawal, who were dissatisfied with Ibrahim’s choice, had challenged his appointment at the state’s High Court on March 6, 1998.

    In its judgment on April 3, 2006, the High Court, among others, voided Ibrahim’s appointment on the ground that it violated Edict No. 3 of 1997.

    Ibrahim appealed to the Court of Appeal, Jos division, but lost, prompting him to appeal to the Supreme Court.

    In upholding the appeal yesterday, the apex court held that the two lower courts were wrong to have assumed jurisdiction over the case  instituted six months after the cause of action arose, as against within three months allowed under the Public Officers Protection Act.

    “Having appointed the appellant (Ibrahim) on June 2, 1997 and, the 1st to 4th respondents becoming aggrieved of the said appointment, their cause of action arose with effect from June 2, 1997.

    ”Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Act states that such an action, prosecution or proceeding ‘shall not lie or be instituted unless it is commenced within three months next after the act, neglect or default complained of.

    ”The effect of the Public Officers Protection Act, like any other statutes of limitation, is to deprive the court of jurisdiction to entertain an action filed outside the time prescribed in the statute.

    “The first to fourth respondents did not file their suit until March 6, 1998, clearly about nine months after their cause of action arose. That action, in my estimation, ought to have been filed not later than 2nd September, 1997.

    “Let me state again for the umpteenth time that where a law prescribes a period for instituting an action, proceedings cannot be instituted after that period,” Justice Okoro said.

    The judge held  that the Kogi State High Court, having been robbed of the jurisdiction to entertain the suit, “in the same vein, the lower court (Court of Appeal) had no jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal, arising from a judgment generated from the High Court which had no jurisdiction to entertain same.

    ”Accordingly, both the judgment of the High Court of Kogi State delivered on April 3, 2006 and that of the court below (Court of Appeal) delivered on January 12, 2009, are hereby set aside,” the Justice Okoro said.

    Other members of the panel, including Justices Ibrahim Mohammad, Muhammad Muuntaka-Coomassie, Olabode Rhodes-Vivour  and Sylvester Ngwuta, agreed with the lead judgment.