Advertisement
The winner of the January 2011 of the People’s Democratic Party PDP primary election in Kogi state, Jibrin Isah Echocho has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the decision of the Court of Appeal which dismissed the suit he brought to challenge the judgement of the federal high court which upheld the victory of Captain Idris Wada at the governorship election.
Echocho had in the first place dragged the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC before a Federal High Court to challenge the conduct of governorship election in Kogi during the pendency of a suit before the apex court.
Captain Idris Wada later joined as a respondent in the suit.
Justice Abdul Kafarati after hearing the suit dismissed Echocho’s suit on ground that it was a post election matter and same should have been directed to the state governorship election.
Not satisfied, Echocho had approached the Court of Appeal praying it to set aside the judgement of the lower court.
Delivering a unanimous judgement at the appellate court, Justice Akomolafe Wilson held that the lower court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the matter in the first place and hence the court was right when it declined jurisdiction.
The Court of Appeal however declined jurisdiction to consider the appeal and therefore dismissed the appeal and upheld the earlier judgement of the lower court.
Still not satisfied, Echocho is now at the apex court to challenge the decision of the two lower courts.
In an appeal filed by his counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, submitted that the Court of Appeal erred in law, when, while concluding that the trial Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate on the appellant’s case adding that the crux of the matter was the Supreme Court decision in SC 357/2011 delivered on January 27, 2012 vis a vis the mandatory provisions of Sections 178(2), 180(2)&(2a) and 287(1) of the Constitution.
He also submitted that the Court of Appeal erred in law and came to a perverse decision when it held that the core or central issue is the question of jurisdiction of the court below to entertain the appellant’s action adding that the matter before the lower court boils down to the validity of the governorship election held by INEC in Kogi state on December 3, 2011 during the pendency of an appeal at the Supreme Court. Adding that the Supreme Court did not in it’s judgement in SC 357/2011 direct fresh elections to be held “in four out of the five states where the 1st Respondent (INEC) sustained an earlier election held on 3rd Dec.,2011”,contrary to the conclusion of the Appeal court.
Olanipekun also submitted that the Court of Appeal erred in law and also came to a wrong decision in its conclusion and judgement that the appellant’s case was a matter suited for an election tribunal and not the Federal High Court.
Another ground on which Echocho hinged his appeal was that the lower court erred in law and came to a wrong decision when it held that the appellant’s claim falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the election tribunal and not the Federal High Court.
Also, the appellant is challenging the judgement of the lower court on grounds that the court misdirected itself in law and came to a wrong conclusion when it held that, to determine the first two issues raised by the appellant in his originating summons would only be tantamount to an academic or moot exercise, since the answers to those questions would not not confer any right of the Appellant. This the Appellant says,is perverse because,the first two issues in question raised serious constitutional questions and specifically called for the application of certain provisions of the constitution. And that,it is the law that,in matters that call for the application of the constitution,the courts have no discretion,
The appellant also claimed that the lower court misdirected itself in law and breached his rights to fair hearing by simply striking out his appeal on the ground that the trial court lacked jurisdiction without considering his case and making pronouncement on its merit in the alternative.
Advertisement
The amended constitution became operational March 11 2011. Wada’s election was conducted December 3, 2011, which was seven months after Governor Idris tenure had ended going by the declaration of the apex court. So Wada’s primary election ought to have gone with the apex court pronouncement. Under these circumstances, Wada couldn’t have been the lawful candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party. The only cogent and verifiable reason (which the constitution and Electoral Act require) provided by the PDP for swapping or substituting Echocho’s name with Wada was that the tenure of Governor Ibrahim Idris had not ended. Given that the Supreme Court Judgment reverted the entire process to status quo before May 29, the PDPs reason cannot be sustained before any impartial Court
Some of the mute point which the Supreme Court will have to clear are; what were the platforms on which the two primary elections were conducted? Which Primary gave room for the election of Wada? Is it the primary that was knocked out by the Supreme Court Judgment?
It can be safe to conclude that the purported election to the office of Governor of Kogi State held by the PDP during the pendency of its appeal to Supreme Court and which purportedly produced Wada as the Governor -elect of Kogi State was unconstitutional, ultra vies, null and void and of no effect whatsoever since it was done in clear violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 178(2) of the constitution, Section 25(8) and 31(1) of the Electoral Act.
Other things being equal, it is my sincere hope that the Apex Court as an independent and impartial umpire will allow the rule of law to prevail by delivering a fair, courageous and untainted judgment
Having followed the legal battle for Lugard House with keen interest, it is my honest conclusion that Jibrin Isah Echocho has a very good case to become the governor of Kogi State. So much of achieving this dream lies in the hand of the judiciary which is construed as the pantheon of constitutional democracy and bulwark of the people against infractions and deprivations of their rights and privileges. The judiciary remains the only public institution that is mandated to provide essential checks on other public institutions. A fair and efficient judiciary is the key to ending electoral malfeasance, corruption, impunity and absurdity.