Ise-Oluwa Ige
21 May 2008
Lagos — A FEDERAL high court sitting in Abuja will today rule on a request by the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP) to halt fresh gubernatorial election scheduled to hold in Sokoto State on May 24, this year.
The judge, Justice Adamu Bello fixed the date yesterday after taking arguments from parties in the case on the issue.
The same political party, had, in the main suit, requested the trial high court to stop the ruling party (PDP) from presenting Aliyu Wagamakatarkada Wammako as its flag-bearer in the re-run governorship election in Sokoto State.
Although the court had ordered parties in the case to file written addresses to fast-track hearing of the suit, DPP had, at the resumed hearing of the case yesterday, orally applied for the suspension of the fresh poll fixed for next Saturday pending determination of the substantive suit.
Mr Rickey Tarfa (SAN) led a team of lawyers that represented DPP yesterday; Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) led a team of lawyers representing Wamakko in the case while Olusola Oke represented the ruling PDP in the matter.
But as soon as the application was made yesterday by DPP through its counsel, Mr Rickey Tarfa (SAN), Wammako, INEC and PDP teamed up to oppose the request
According to Wole Olanipekun (SAN) representing Wamakko, he said the plaintiff earlier vowed to make sure that the substantive case was dragged to the Supreme Court.
He said he agreed with DPP on its right to stretch the case to the apex court but that assuming the case would take about two years to conclude, he asked whether the election would not be conducted.
His exact words: "they vowed that this case will get to the Supreme Court. Yes, we agree but assuming that this case lasts for two years before the supreme court decides, does it mean that there would be no election for two years when section 191(2) of the 1999 constitution empowers the speaker of the house to act as governor for just three months.
"I submit that the power of INEC to fix a date for election can't be questioned by any court. So the court can't suspend election as being canvassed.
"While the court can assume jurisdiction to examine and determine whether you (the judge) have jurisdiction, you cannot in the process make any coercive order in respect of your jurisdiction being challenged.
"The Supreme Court has said that a court cannot make a coercive order in determining the issue of jurisdiction and this court can't even make any binding order against people who are not before you," Olanipekun (SAN) said.
Besides, he argued that "to grant this prayer, you will be suspending the judgment of the Court of Appeal on April 11 as well as the provisions of the constitution.
"A judgment of the court cannot be interpreted vide originating summons. This relief by the applicants are not grantable.
"The judgment sought to be interpreted was given on April 11 and this suit was filed on 25th of April and the matter came up last Tuesday for the first time. We didn't ask for adjournment. Rather, we have asked for abridgment of our time.
"If anybody is guilty of tardiness or delay, it is the plaintiff.
"My client has started campaign. A lot of resources have been committed into it. He is now saying election should be postponed. Till when? If anybody is guilty of tardiness or delay, it is the plaintiff.
I urge the court to refuse this application which is so selfish. It is not supported by any fact or affidavit evidence," he concluded.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) represented by Mr Olusola Oke also said: "this application is a surprise on us and is against the rules of this court and fair hearing as enshrined in the constitution to the effect that parties should be given a reasonable time to react to applications.
"By the ruling of this court on April 15, all applications especially the preliminary objections filed against hearing of this suit were consolidated and scheduled to be heard together with the substantive suit.
"To entertain this instant application, this court must first determine that you have jurisdiction; that they (the plaintiffs) have locus and that they have reasonable cause of action.
"The only application that can be granted in this matter before the issue of jurisdiction is determined is that of adjournment
"The court cannot make any order of injunction except the issue of jurisdiction is determined first
"Besides, even if the application must be made, it must be made formally. It can't be made orally.
"I agree with Olanipekun that people whose interest are affected are not even here including the political party, the electorates and others.
"Again, the plaintiffs have not been excluded from participating in the election. He has not shown what injury he would suffer if the injunction is not granted and the irreversible damage that will occur if the election holds.
"An interim order only protects irreversible damage.
"Their argument was that Wamakko is not qualified to contest the election. Fine. There is no need stopping the election. This is because there is a remedy. If somebody who is not qualified to contest an election is allowed to go into election, you can go to court to boot him out of office.
"The issue involved here is a public right and he is a private person.
The cause of action before the court is interpretation of the judgment of the Court of Appeal. It cannot be protected by an injunction. The interpretation can be done anytime.
Although Mr Rickey Tarfa tried to persuade the court further with authourities which he promised to supply to court later, the trial court later adjourned ruling on the argument till today.
Vanguard recalls that the Court of Appeal sitting in Kaduna had last month nullified the election of Alhaji Aliyu Magatarka Wamakko as governor of Sokoto State .
The court had ruled that Wamakko, as at the time of the April 14 election, was not qualified to contest the election since he was a member of the ANPP and had not been duly cleared as a PDP member.
The tribunal directed the Speaker of the Sokoto State House of Assembly to take over pending a fresh election which should be held within 90 days.
The election shall be between the candidates that contested the April 14 governorship election, the appeal court ruled, a matter on which DPP is now seeking an interpretation.
But ahead the fresh poll, the national leadership of the main opposition party in the state, the Democratic Peoples Party {DPP} filed a suit seeking the interpretation of the judgment of the appeal court as it relates to the candidature of Wamakko.
The party is contending that given the pronouncement of the Court of Appeal, the former governor, Wamakko is estopped from participating in the re-run election.
The plaintiffs are contending that since the Court of Appeal had held that Wammako's candidature was unlawful, what it meant was that he was not a candidate in the April 14 election and could not be a candidate in the re-run election since the lawful candidates are those ordered to participate in the fresh election.
They are asking the court to declare that Wammako, by virtue of the judgment sacking him from office, cannot be a candidate in the fresh election, which would also rob the ruling PDP the opportunity of presenting a candidate for the election.
The plaintiffs equally wanted the court to stop INEC from conducting the fresh election with Wammako as a candidate pending the determination of the suit.
Co-respondents in the matter, PDP and INEC had placed preliminary objection before the court, challenging the locus standi of the plaintiffs to bring the action.
The defendants said that the lack of locus standi by the plaintiffs robbed the court the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the suit, which according to them did not disclose any cause of action.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 Vanguard. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
