From Yenogua, Bayelsa State
–
*** PDP& Presidency fingered
The Supreme Court of Nigeria, Abuja this Monday in a Suit No. SC/369/2012 has reserved judgment for appeal filed by the candidate of the Change Advocacy Party (CAP) over August 31 verdict of the Bayelsa State Governorship Election Petition Appeal that was held in Port Harcourt which declared Henry Seriake Dickson as Governor of Bayelsa State.
The Change Advocacy Party (CAP) and its governorship candidate, Dr. Imoro Goodhead Kubor had filed an appeal at the Supreme Court challenging the ruling of Honourable Justice M.L. Tsamiya-led Appeal Court in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
www.247ureports.com authoritatively gathered from Supreme Court, who pleaded profusely not to be mentioned that two PDP power brokers who allegedly claimed they are from the Presidency when asked, to meet with Chief Justice of the Federation and two others. Asked why they could not reach her on phone, GSM providers could burged calls and that it will be proper for them to meet her face to face, they said.
The source, who is a senior law officer, further said he was sensing their meeting with Madam in respect of the Bayelsa State governorship issue which to be decided on Thursday 25th October, 2012 by 9 am in the morning. According to our source he wondered whether the Chief Justice of the Federation will fall to their prey if they are sure of clear Justice on the matter. What is so special for their meeting with her today? The source queried.
One Political observer said the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) is fond of bribing Judges to perpetrate injustice in the country. We are tired of the party called PDP and they have started it again; the Supreme Court should come out with clear findings on the matter without bias.
When contacted, the Governor’s aide in Yenagoa, he added that the Governor Henry Seriake Dickson can’t lose the battle because the President is from the state, so therefore the party won’t lose to any other political party that claimed to have registered with INEC which is not known to us here in the state. The aide added that when worse come to the worse, the party will roll out a month allocation to take care on the issue. This is what we did at the Appeal Court and we are sure of this very one at the Supreme Court. The party appointed the Judges, and when the party talks to them why won’t they listen, Dickson’s aide boasted.
www.247ureports.com investigations gathered that three of the Appeal Court Justices were allegedly brought in from outside to do the marathon Judgment in Port Harcourt and left to their various states. With this development, sources believe that the party can go extra mile to do their bidden on this matter also.
The five Justices of the appeal court were, Coram Honourable Justices M.L. Tsamiya, P.A. Galinje, J.I. Okoro, M.A. Danjuma and T.O. Awotoye JJCA. In their considered opinion dismissed the appeal against the Change Advocacy Party (CAP) and its governorship candidate, Dr. Imoro Kubor on the ground that ‘Exhibit “N” was resolved at the lower tribunal against Dr. Imoro Kubor and the ground of appeal upon which it was formulated was dismissed.’ And Judgment was delivered on the 31st day of August, 2012 in Appeal No. CA/PH/EPT/10/2012.
A retired appeal court Judge who pleaded not to be on print said how can exhibit “N” which is an ex-parte order be used by learned Justices as Judgment? It is here in Nigeria that Judges do whatever they like. Ex-parte order is an order directing someone base on the urgency of the matter which refused to hear from other side pending when the final determination of the case.
Leading Counsels to Dr. Kubor and change Advocacy party (CAP), who are celebrated lawyers and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Rickey Tarfa, Chief Emeka Ngige, A.J. Owonikoko and other senior lawyers said the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal misconstrued the complaint of Dr. Imoro Kubor and Change Advocacy party and erred in law because Exhibit “N” an ex-parte order issued in admittedly discontinued Suit NO. FHC/ABJ/CS/3/2012 on the non-qualification on Hon. Henry Dickson to contest the Bayelsa State Gubernatorial Election held on 11th February, 2012 was not taking into consideration before its ruling, stressing that it is a miscarriage of justice.
Rickey Tarfa, SAN further averred that the argument of Dr. kubor against Exhibit “N” is that being ex-parte interim order is a decision and not a final judgment – because it does not determine the right in litigation on which a party can rely in a subsequent suit to establish its right to a relief or defense.
The leading counsel Rickey Tarfa, SAN equally said the reasoning of the appeal court prevented the five Justices from properly appraising the arguments of Dr. Imoro Kubor and Change Advocacy Party (CAP) that the ex-parte order was proof that prior to commencement of the suit in which it was made, adding that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had not validly nominated Hon. Henry Seriake Dickson for the election as required by the 1999 constitution and the relevant mandatory provisions of the Electoral Act.
But Rickey Tarfa, SAN disproved the five Justices that section 84 provides for two alternatives for proving authenticity of electronically generated evidence so as to render it admissible in the sense that these Exhibits were tendered from the bar at the lower election petition tribunal. And that internets print out from INEC website in litigation which is not disputed by INEC as authentic is admissible in evidence against Hon. Henry Dickson and the Peoples Democratic Party.
Rickey Tarfa, SAN further argued that whether invalidly sponsored candidate by a political party can rise on his stage of nomination? That Hon. Henry Seriake Dickson was not nominated by the party. That the right of a party to nominate is separate from the duty of the party to validly sponsor a candidate. As par the close of nomination, Hon. Henry Seriake Dickson was not a candidate with Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has no candidate.
That Hon. Henry Seriake Dickson then filed an action in Abuja, less than twenty three (23) days to the election and base on that action, Hon. Dickson was entitled to contest because Hon. Dickson was a disqualified candidate, why? His name must be emerged and must be recognize by INEC not less than thirty (30) days to the date of the election. His nomination must be valid in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Electoral Act (as amended 2010), that Hon. Henry Seriake Dickson was not qualified to be elected into office of Governor of Bayelsa State as required by law.
A retired appeal court Judge who pleaded not to be on print said how can exhibit “N” which is an ex-parte order that learned Justices used as Judgment? It is here in Nigeria that Judges do whatever they like. Ex-parte order is an order directing someone base on the urgency of the matter which refused to hear from other side pending when the parties involved will come back within a specific date to here the matter. So, asked me with this explanation how a learned Justices can conclude that ex-parte order formed part of Judgment in law? This is amazing in the eyes of law, he lamented.
As at the time of this report, the Presidential Spokesperson and PDP Publicity Secretary’s mobile lines were called but met bricks wall.
