The Nation Newspaper

Tag: upholds

  • Supreme Court upholds Kogi gov’s election

    The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal which had sought the nullification of the 2011 governorship election from which Captain Idris Wada (retired) emerged as the governor of Kogi State. Idris contested the election as the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    The appeal was initiated by the governorship candidate of the now defunct Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), James Ocholi (SAN). Ocholi, amomg others, urged the court to nullify Wada’s election and declare him the validly elected governor.

    Ocholi had contended that Wada was not qualified to contest in the December 3, 2011 governorship election because he (Wada) was not a candidate for the election earlier scheduled for April 26 of the same year.

    He argued that the election earlier scheduled for April 26, 2011 was not cancelled but only postponed to December 3, 2011, on the account of a court order.

    Ocholi argued that the submission of nomination forms by candidates having closed on February 28, 2011 for the rescheduled April 26 election, Wada, who later became a candidate in the election held on December 3, 2011 was not qualified to participate in the election.

    In a unanimous judgment yesterday, the Supreme Court held that Ocholi’s appeal lacked merit. Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun read the lead judgment.

    The Court affirmed the concurrent judgments of the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court in Lokoja, which had both dismissed the appellant’s case. It held that the Federal High Court, Lokoja had in its judgment delivered on July 10, 2013, rightly dismissed Ocholi’s suit for lack of jurisdiction.

    It further held that the prayers sought by Ocholi, in substance and in nature, was a matter that could be entertained by the election petition tribunal.

    “The aim of the appellant’s suit was the nullification of the victory of Wada at the election held on December 3, 2011 and a declaration that he is the lawful winner of the election and the person validly entitled to be sworn in as the governor of Kogi state.

    “The Federal High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain his claims. The concurrent decisions of the two lower courts in this regard cannot be faulted. The appellant has not advanced any cogent reasons to warrant interference by this court.”

    The court held that Ocholi waited for more than three months after the conduct of the election that produced Wada as governor before raising the issue of qualification of the candidates who participated in the election.

    “It had become a post-election matter that could only be determined by an election tribunal. I agree with the learned senior counsel for the respondent (Wada) that having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant had every opportunity to institute his action before the conduct of the election.

    “Not only did he fail to challenge any of the steps taken by the Independent National Electoral Commission such as the publication of a new timetable for the conduct of primaries, the new election date and the list of qualified candidates for the December 3rd 2011 election, he fully participated in the new primaries and contested the election,.” The court said.

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, Justices  Afolabi ‎Fabiyi, Dantijo Muhammad, Clara Ogunbiyi, John Okoro and Centus Nweze, who were in the panel that heard the appeal, agreed with the lead judgment.

  • Senate upholds report on $49.8b oil cash

    Senate upholds report on $49.8b oil cash

    Senate President David Mark yesterday faulted the National Assembly for not carrying out its oversight duties diligently before former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, raised the alarm.

    Sanusi accused the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) of failing to remit $49.8billion oil revenue to the Federation Account.

    Mark spoke during the consideration of the report of the Senate Committee on Finance that investigated the allegation.

    The report which has generated controversy, was submitted by the Chairman, Senate Committee on Finance, Senator Ahmed Makarfi  on May 28.

    Mark commended the committee for presenting a courageous report based on the facts that were presented to it.

    He said the committee was forthright by paying attention to details in the course of investigation.

    He lamented that the NNPC did not follow due process by disbursing unappropriated funds for subsidy payments.

    He vowed that no matter before the 7th Senate would be swept under the carpet.

    Mark said: “At the inception of the 7th Senate, I did say emphatically that there is no issue in this country that we cannot discuss as respected and Distinguished Senators of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “If we have the courage to set up a committee, nothing will stop us from taking the report of that committee and nothing will be swept under the carpet in this red chamber.

    “I think what is glaringly from this report is that we are all guilty.  If the committees expected to carry out oversight functions on the NNPC were doing their job very well, we wouldn’t have needed the Governor of Central Bank to ring an alarm bell before reacting.

    “Whether the alarm is genuine or not, is another matter. The Executive may have good reasons but the legislature obviously do not have reasons not to find out. Let me appeal to the various committees to endeavour to do their work.

    “Facts are different from rumours and what we have before us are the facts based on the interview conducted by the committee on public hearing and on all the documents that they could put together.

    “One thing is very obvious, due process has not been followed and they have stated so very clearly.”

    There was however drama when Senator Sadiq Yar’ Adua moved that the report be stepped down to another legislative day to enable lawmakers study it.

    He said the report contained impeachable offences committed by President Goodluck Jonathan.

    Yar’Adua said: “The report was given to us (Senators) a while ago and I think it is too short a time for us to dissect this report which is 73 pages and which is also containing issues about alleged missing $49.8billion.

    “I think it is important for us to go and read the report because actually if you look at the report, I can smell some impeachable offences committed by the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.”

    Yar’Adua was overruled by Mark.

    Mark said: “For you to just say a report has been presented and it contains impeachable offences is totally unnecessary. That is not the issue here.”

    On persistent compliants that most resolutions of the National Assembly were not being implemented by the Executive, Mark said the legislature is to blame.

    He said: “We would have to be supported by 2/3 majority. If we have to do so, we have to enact a law that would make our resolutions binding, it is not something that could be done by voice vote.”

    He warned the lawmakers not to politicise or jump to conclusions on the alleged missing funds when reconciliations were still ongoing.

    He said: “Whether it is funds yet to be remitted,  funds yet to be reconciled or funds yet unaccounted for or missing, I think we should not play politics with it. Because if we described it as missing or unaccounted for, the issue is that there is a reconciliation going on.

    “When you say outright it is missing, then you have concluded. The point I am trying to make is that we should not conclude when the process of reconciliation is still ongoing.”

    The Senate President warned that it would be fool hardy to remove fuel subsidy without first sensitising the people on the matter.

    He said any attempt to do so now would pitch the people against the National Assembly.

    He said: I want to appeal that we should not pitch ourselves against the public opinion. If subsidy has to be removed, there must be public enlightenment and education so that facts would be made available to the people and then public opinion at the end of the day will count.

    “If  we  sit here now and said remove subsidy,  I think those who are benefitting from subsidy are very powerful and tomorrow they would influence media report and twist it to create an impression that Senate is anti-people.

    “If the subsidy has to go, I don’t have problems with that but let us sensitise the people over a very long period of time so that everybody will be carried along and everybody will be on board and then can take a final decision on the issue of subsidy because the recommendations are far reaching.”

    Senate in its resolution rejected a recommendation of the Committee that fuel subsidy should be scrapped.

    The upper chamber also resolved to fast track the passage of the Petroleum industry Bill (PIB) to ensure proper restructuring and administration of the oil sector.

    The Senate also ordered the NNPC to refund $262million to the Federation account with interest.

    Senator Ayogu Eze (Enugu North) called for the total removal of subsidy to stem the abuse that has attended it.

    He called for the prosecution of those found to have enriched themselves illegally through the proceeds from oil sales.

    Senator Ahmed Lawan, described the development of the missing funds as a wake up call for the executive the legislature.

    Senator Heineken Lopobiri, described the subsidy regime as a hard nut to crack because it encourages corruption.

    He urged the executive to probe the subsidy regime.

    He said the report has established that no $49.8billion was missing and that the amount discovered not to have fully reconciled would be taken care of in the forensic audit report still being awaited.

    Senator Abdul Ningi said the report of the probe panel demoralised him because of the revelations about how the NNPC expended funds without appropriation.

    Ningi disagreed with Senators Eze and Lopobiri, who called for the removal of subsidy on petrol.

    He insisted that the removal will make already impoverished Nigerians to suffer.

    Senator Smart Adeyemi (Kogi West) said the allegation about the missing funds was made to score cheap political points.

    He however admitted that there are glaring abuses in the way and manner the proceeds from oil sales were being managed.

    He noted that spending government revenue without appropriation is a breach of the constitution and called for the prosecution of those found to have acted illegally.

    Adeyemi said: “On the issue of subsidy, it is the only thing that is left for the country, those who have been accused of abusing the subsidy should be prosecuted because I will not support the subsidy removal.

    “At the same time, the nation’s refinery, because those behind the continued non-functional state of the refineries are those who were implementing the subsidy regime, we need to know the names of the directors of companies which are enjoying subsidy.”

    The Senate vetoed a recommendation that fuel subsidy be removed.

    It approved a resolution that the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company (NPDC) should refund $447million to the federation account being balance of royalty and Petroleum Profit Tax (PPT).

    The Senate also ordered the NNPC to refund $262million to the Federation Account being expenses it could not satisfactorily defend in respect of Holding Strategic Stock Reserve; Pipeline Maintenance and Management Cost; and Capital Expenditure.

  • Tribunal upholds Obiano’s election

    Tribunal upholds Obiano’s election

    The Anambra State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal in Awka yesterday upheld Governor Willie Obiano’s election. It dismissed the four petitions filed against him by other candidates.

    The tribunal Chairman, Justice Ishaq Bello, held that the petitions of Chike Obidigbo, belonging to a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Senator Chris Ngige of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Tony Nwoye of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the party lacked merit.

    Justice Bello, in four judgments, held that Obiano’s election complied with the Electoral Act 2010 and the 1999 Constitution.

    He held that Obidigbo lacked the locus standi under Section 137 of the Electoral Act to file the petition because it dwelt on an intra-party matter.

    “It is highly illogical, inconceivable and injurious for APGA, which won an election to petition itself at the tribunal.

    “The failure of the petitioner to produce forms CF001 and CF002 cast a doubt on his claim of nomination as a candidate in the election,” Bello said.

    The judge discountenanced the allegation of multiple registration against Obiano for lack of evidence by the petitioner.

    On Ngige’s petition, he held that the petitioner’s witnesses failed to produce the voters’ register to explain or demonstrate how they were disenfranchised.

    “The petitioner failed to prove that the failure of the Independent National Electoral Commissioner (INEC) workers to swear an oath of neutrality affected the validity of the poll.

    “In our view, the case of multiple registration is baseless; the submission that Obiano’s voter’s card is a forged document is misconceived.

    “We are, therefore, unable to hold that Obiano was not qualified to contest the election,” the tribunal held.

    The judge said only INEC could prove the falsification of its document, adding that the petitioner’s failure to call INEC to give evidence was fatal to the case.

    Ngige alleged disenfranchisement of voters, invalid voters’ register, multiple registration by Obiano and corrupt practices as some of the electoral malpractices, which affected the poll.

    On Nwoye’s petition seeking nullification of the election for alleged irregularities and disenfranchisement, Bello held that the petitioner failed to prove the case.

    Nwoye contended that the alleged removal of his name from the voters’ register formed part of the irregularities noticed during the poll.

    Bello, however, said the petitioner failed to prove the allegation that dead persons voted, saying Nwoye’s evidence fell short of electoral standard.

    He held that PDP’s petition, which alleged corrupt practices in four polling units of the 4,608 polling units, was not substantial to nullify the election.

    The judge noted that the PDP failed to prove the allegation of multiple registration, missing names in the voters’ register and voting by dead persons.

    Bello hailed the cooperation and maturity displayed by parties and urged them to sustain the attitude.

    INEC declared Obiano of APGA winner of the November 16, 2013, November 17, 2013 and November 30, 2013 governorship election after polling 180,178 votes, on December 1, 2013.

    Nwoye came second with 97, 700 votes, Ngige came third with 95,963 votes, while Mr. Patrick Ubah of the Labour Party (LP) polled 36, 495 votes.

    Ngige, Nwoye and Obidigbo said they would head for the Appeal Court in Enugu to challenge the judgment.

    Although the petitioners and the respondents were not at the tribunal, except Umeh, their lawyers said they would challenge the verdict.

    INEC counsel, Mrs. Odinaka Ikoroha, told The Nation that the commission had been vindicated.

    The woman, who led other INEC lawyers, described the judgment as a landmark.

    Counsel to APC and Ngige, who represented Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN) and Emeka Ngige (SAN), Ngozi Udodi, has applied to the tribunal for the release of the comprehensive judgment.

    She told The Nation that they must appeal the judgment, which was also the view of Mr. J.O. Onwujekwu, who made oral application for Obidigbo.

    He said the essence was to prepare themselves for the appeal, describing the judgment as lopsided.

  • Supreme Court upholds Okorocha’s election

    Supreme Court upholds Okorocha’s election

    •Faults PDP, Ohakim’s bids to reopen settled issue • I’ve forgiven my detractors, says governor

    Owerri, Imo State capital, erupted in spontaneous jubilation yesterday as the Supreme Court upheld the election of the Governor of Imo State, Owelle Rochas Okorocha.

    In a judgment yesterday, the court held that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) could no longer reopen the case which its candidate, Ohakim Ikedi had unsuccessfully challenged before an election tribunal.

    The six-man panel that heard the case berated the Owerri Division of the Court of Appeal for allowing PDP to have a second bite at the cherry when it joined the party in a suit filed by Ifeanyi Ararume, the candidate of the Action Congress of Nigeria in the governorship election.

    Justice Clara Ogunbiyi, who read the lead judgment, advised PDP and Ohakim to abide by their fate and hope for a better political future instead of making futile attempt at using the back door to have a revisit to their case which had been finished with.

    Justice Ogunbiyi held that the subject matter which PDP sought to appeal was the same as that which had been finally determined by the Supreme Court by way of an election petition.

    She held that the issues which the party wanted to raise at the Court of Appeal were post-election matters justiceable only before an election tribunal.

    “This is more so where the time prescribed by law and mandating him (Ohakim) within which to conduct his case had elapsed; providence expects him to abide by his fate and hope for a better political future,” she held.

    She further held that by joining PDP to the suit, the Court of Appeal was capable of causing anarchy in the country.

    Justice Ogunbiyi noted that the Court of Appeal was aware of the fact that the Supreme Court had decided in finality the legality of the supplementary election held in Imo, after it upheld the decisions of both the Imo State Election Tribunal and the Court of Appeal.

    She held that it was illegal and unconstitutional for a candidate to seek to appeal as an interested party a judgment in an election matter after the election in which he was a candidate had held and the time to file petition against same had also lapsed.

    “By the provision of section 235 of our constitution, the decision of the Supreme Court is final in gubernatorial election matters.

    “The Court of Appeal is therefore without any stretch of imagination duty bound by section 287 of the same constitution to give effect to judgments of this court.

    “The implication of the lower court having obliged the application are far reaching, very detrimental and damaging for breaching section 235 of the constitution on finality of the judgment of this court,” Justice Ogunbiyi held.

    The court upheld the submission of Okorocha’s lawyer, Chief Adeniyi Akintola, SAN, that the PDP’s proposed grounds of appeal were an indirect way of challenging Okorocha’s election contrary to section 134 of the Electoral Act, 2010 which prescribed the modality of challenging an election petition.

    “In other words, with the 1st respondent (PDP) having pursued the petition tooth and nail and lost from the inception at the trial tribunal right through the Court of Appeal and to this court, it cannot surreptitiously, through the back door, by reason of the ruling obtained from the lower court, again have a second revisit to his case.

    “The Court of Appeal, by granting the leave in the circumstance at hand with the subject matter having been dealt with finally by this court, had overreacted the constitutional finality inherent in the decision of the Supreme Court and thus also breaching section 235 of the Constitution on the finality of the Supreme Court judgment.

    “The quest for power and governance shoul not be without end.

    “The court’s, particularly the apex court, which has the duty to give example to all subordinate courts, should be wary against accommodating situations where litigation subsist without end under the guise of do or die attitude which effect would only make nonsense of our entire judiciary and legal system which has specifically put in place measures to check on the unending lethargy of our political ambition.

    “The slogan, there must be an end to litigation, should persistently sound loud and clear in our polity.

    “This is a matter of public policy which should not create a societal gangrene.”

    Justice Ogunbiyi upheld Okorocha’s appeal and order the respondents–the Peoples Democratic Party, Ifeanyi Ararume and the Independent National Electoral Commission–to each pay N100,000 as cost to Okorocha.

    The Owerri Division of the Court of Appeal on February 3, 2012 granted leave to PDP to appeal a judgment delivered by a Federal High Court in Owerri, Imo State which had dismissed a suit by Ararume challenging the constitutionality of the supplementary election held in Imo State.

    The High Court had dismissed the case on the ground that the subject matter of the suit was a post-election matter.

    Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Federal High Court, Ararume filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal in Owerri.

    While Ararume’ s appeal was pending, the PDP, which sponsored Ohakim, brought an application praying the court for leave to appeal, as an interested party, against the judgment of the Federal High Court.

    Although Okorocha vehemently opposed the PDP’s application for leave to appeal, the Court of Appeal allowed PDP’s application and consequently made the PDP a party to the suit.

    Okorocha was dissatisfied and immediately appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing among others that the Court of Appeal was wrong in joining PDP to the suit.

    Reacting to the judgment yesterday, Okorocha said the judgment was an indication that his mandate was divine.

    The Governor who spoke with newsmen at the Government House, Owerri, also said he had forgiven his detractors, adding that it was time for all, irrespective of political and religious affiliations, to join hands to move the state forward.

    He said: “I thank God that the age-long case and distraction has finally come to an end. I thank the Judiciary for rising up to the occasion in the defence of our democracy. This administration is a divine mandate and those fighting it are fighting God.

    “The Judiciary has has remained a propeller in our democracy with popular rulings and judgment.”

     

  • Supreme Court upholds Mimiko’s election

    The Supreme Court yesterday declared Dr. Olusegun Mimiko of the Labour Party (LP) winner of last October’s governorship election in Ondo State.

    The court dismissed the appeals of Mr. Oluwarotimi Akeredolu (SAN) of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and Mr. Olusola Oke of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    Justice Sylvester Ngwuta delivered the judgment in Akeredolu’s appeal. Justice Mary Odili read the judgment in Oke’s case.

    The court held that Akeredolu failed to prove his allegation that LP members engaged in multiple registration beyond reasonable doubt.

    It faulted Akeredolu’s allegation that the voters’ register used for the election was manipulated and held that the appellant failed to produce the allegedly manipulated register in court.

    The court held that Akeredolu failed to show whether the 100,000 voters allegedly injected into the register engaged in multiple voting or other malpractices.

    It said Akeredolu could not substantiate how the alleged injection into the register substantially affected the election to warrant its cancellation as requested in his petition.

    The court said even if the 100,000 voters allegedly injected into the register voted for Akeredolu, he would not have won the election because the winner won with over 100,000 votes.

    It held that the appellant’s claim of alleged manipulation of the register was strange, having claimed in his petition that the register was not made available to him and was not published or displayed in the public.

    The court said Oke failed to prove how the alleged injection of voters into the register affected the credibility of the election.

    It said most of Oke’s complaints were criminal in nature and should have been referred to security agents.

    Mimiko thanked the people for their support and prayers during the legal battle.

    Addressing his supporters at the Democracy Park in Akure after the judgement, Mimko said he would “continue to execute people-oriented programmes”. He pledged to provide jobs for the youth soon.

    The governor hailed the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) and the Supreme Court judges for cutting short their vacation to deliver the judgment.

    He said it was the first time the Supreme Court would cut short its vacation to deliver a judgment.

    Mimiko described the judgment as “the victory of democracy”. He urged his opponents to put the judgment behind them and support him to improve the state.

    He again debunked the rumour that his deputy, Alhaji Ali Olanusi, had resigned, adding that the House of Assembly had no plan to impeach him (Olanusi).

    Olanusi hailed the judgment and urged the people to support Mimiko.

  • Court upholds Okonjo as Obi of Ogwashi-Uku

    The Court of Appeal , Benin Division, has declared the Umu Obi Obahai royal family of Ogwashi-Uku, Delta State, the only family qualified to produce the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku.

    The court also upheld the appointment of the father of the Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Prof Chukuka Okonjo, as the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku.

    The court upheld the decision of the High Court of Delta State, Ogwashi-Uku, which sat on the same issue.

    Okonjo comes from the Umu Obi Obahai royal line of Ogwashi-Uku.

    The Court of Appeal upheld nine of the 10 reliefs sought by the Umu Obi Obahai royal line, including the issue of the family that can produce the Obi.

    The judgment endorsed the position of the Obahai family that succession to the throne of the Obi of Ugwashi Uku is hereditary by primogeniture and that the last validly installed Obi of Ugwashi Uku was Obahai.

    It also confirms that Dieyi, the forefather of the Dieyi family, which challenged the Obahai position was never an Obi but a mere regent, who held the throne in trust because Obahai’s children were minors at the time of his death.

    A statement by Okonjo’s spokesperson Law Okolobi said the council was pleased that the truth has been confirmed and justice carried out.

    The statement added that the Obi is convinced that the judgment is a victory for the people of Ogwashi-Uku.

    Obi Obahai reigned from 1870 to 1882. Since his demise, the regency prevailed until 22 years ago when his descendants decided to take back the stool.

    The defendants contended that the monarchy had changed hands severally and, having been gazetted by the government, the stool should remain with the Dieyi Family.

    This prompted the plaintiffs, especially the Okonjos, to go to court.

    “His Majesty, the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku, Prof Chukuka Okonjo and the Obi-in-Council, are very pleased that the truth in this matter has been confirmed and justice served.

    “It is the Obi’s conviction that the judgment is a victory for the entire people of Ogwashi-Uku,” the statement reads.

  • Court upholds ex-NANS president’s election

    The Court of Appeal has upheld the election of a former President of the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS), Tony Nwoye, as the elected member of the House of Representatives for Anambra East/West Federal Constituency.

    The Court of Appeal, Enugu Division, gave the judgment on Wednesday when it threw out the application of the incumbent, Ameke Chriscato Ikechukwu.

    Ikechukwu filed an appeal challenging the judgment of Justice P. F. Olayiwola of the Federal High Court, Awka, on July 13, last year, which declared Nwoye as the validly nominated candidate for the April 2011 poll.

    In the enrolling order served on the House of Representatives yesterday, Justice E. Agim of the Court of Appeal, said: “The appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

    “That there shall be cost of N30,000 in favour of the first respondent(Nwoye).”

    Nwoye was declared the winner of the election into Anambra East/West Federal Constituency by the Federal High Court, Awka, on July 13, last year.

    The court compelled the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise Nwoye as the Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) candidate, instead of Ikechukwu.

    Based on the judgment, INEC, on July 16, last year, issued a Certificate of Return to Nwoye.

    But Ikechukwu filed a motion for a stay of execution at the Court of Appeal.

    The Court of Appeal, on February 27, struck out the application for lack of prosecution.

    Ikechukwu, however, went ahead with the substantive case at the Court of Appeal by asking the appellate court to declare him the real PDP candidate.

    He also asked the Court of Appeal to upturn the July 13, last year, judgment of the Federal High Court.

    The appellate court, however, insisted on Wednesday that Nwoye was the PDP candidate and should be sworn in accordingly.

    It was gathered that Ikechukwu has approached the Supreme Court.

    He is asking for a stay of execution of the judgment of the Federal High Court of last year.

    Nwoye yesterday said the fact that Ikechukwu is in the Supreme Court should not stop his inauguration by the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

    He said: “The fact that Chriscato has filed a stay of execution at the Supreme Court does not in any way stop my swearing in.

    “The Speaker and the Clerk of the House are not parties in the Court of Appeal judgment and the application for stay at the Supreme Court. They do not have any business with the stay.”