Enugu — The Court of Appeal sitting in Enugu yesterday reserved judgment indefinitely, in the application filed by former domestic aide to ex President Olusegun Obasanjo, Andy Uba of the Peoples Democratic Party [PDP] seeking to be declared governor of Anambra State on account of an election he won in 2007.

It also struck out an application filed by Patrick Ikwueto [SAN], on behalf of four concerned persons of Anambra State, who sought the nod of the court to be joined in the matter, as well as upheld the notice of withdrawal of one of the parties in the case, Chief Alex Ogboli.

Ikwueto, who represented the concerned persons said they wanted to be joined in the case following their realization that failure of the Independent National Electoral Commission [INEC] to conduct governorship election in the state next year on the account of the pending case would deny them their franchise as contained in the 1999 Constitution; as well as human rights charter.

Uba who was pronounced winner of the April 2007 governorship election in Anambra State had his reign terminated on June 4, 2007, following the ruling of the Supreme Court that Governor Peter Obi's tenure was still running and would not expire until March 17, 2010.

Following the judgment, Uba approached the Court of Appeal Enugu Division, where the court on February 18, 2008, held that the governorship election of Anambra State was valid and that his [Uba] inauguration on May 29, 2007 as governor of Anambra State remains intact.

At the resumption of hearing on the matter yesterday, Counsel to Uba, Wole Olanipekun [SAN], said that a recent ruling of the Supreme Court on Nicholas Ukachukwu Vs INEC had shown that the Court of Appeal was the final court with the constitutional powers to pronounce on electoral matters.

"The Supreme Court made it clear that the Court of Appeal is the bus stop and terminus in election matters arising from governorship and National and State Houses of Assembly elections," arguing however, that his colleagues have left the substances of the case to argue that the Court of Appeal could not over rule the Supreme Court.

Olanipekun, who said he filed two sets of replies in line with the order of the court to buttress his case for a consequential order as well as to illustrate that the court has jurisdiction to review its own decision, insisted that the leading judgment of the court was the ruling of that court.

He referred to the ruling of Aderemi in the case of Obi Vs INEC, paragraphs A- F, where according to him, the court was specific that the case brought before it by governor [Obi] was not an election matter, adding that in their ruling in [reference KAB3], they made it clear that they merely interpreted Obi's tenure.

He said bearing in mind paragraphs 645 -646 of the encompassing judgement, especially the fact that Obi's tenure expires by March 17 next year, the question that should be asked should be what happens thereafter, in view of the pronouncement of the court that, "Andy Uba should vacate the seat for substantive Peter Obi to serve out his tenure".

Opposing the application, counsel to Dame Virgy Etiaba [1st respondent], Nnoruka Udechukwu [SAN] said the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case of Obi Vs INEC has rendered the application a nullity, explaining that by the pronouncement, the implication was that section 178 subsections 2 of the 1999 constitution there was no vacancy at government house Awka, to warrant the holding of an election in 2007.

He said: "You cannot rely on the basis of a process that runs foul to grant a right. The application is relying on a purported certificate of return issued to him on basis of election and it is based on this that he is asking the court to pronounce him a governor by 2010 when there will be a vacancy.

"Now that certificate is not before the court in an election setting. It had never been before this court, it was never before tribunal, no finding of fact was made in respect to it for the simple reason that the cross petition upon which it was made was not heard. If this court makes no finding of fact in respect of it, can it now base a consequential order in nature of prayer sought by the applicant?"

Udechukwu who said the application was an affront to the court, contended that any consideration given to evidence not before the court was a misnomer and miscarriage of justice.

Describing the application before the court as "novel", he referred the court to the fact that the panel that gave the earlier ruling was not the present panel, urging the members to maintain the sanity and respect of the court as the temple of justice.

"No court of law can ever be called upon to interpret its own judgment. If INEC or Uba wants an interpretation, it should go to the appropriate quarters, which is the Federal High Court by way of originating summons, adding that the application should be regarded as "absolutely trivializing the integrity of the judicial system".

His position was supported by Emeka Ngige [SAN], who urged the court to dismiss it since upholding it would be setting a bad precedence.

He said before the Aderemi's judgement which was being relied upon by Uba's counsel, Justice Kaisna Alu had delivered an interim judgment, where it held that the elections ought not to have held.

Stressing that the applicant had become desperate having approached the court four times to renew the judgment, he said it was a clumsy way of getting something out of nothing, adding that it is only a court of first instance that could take the application.

He said there couldn't be two certificates of return at a time when a serving governor still holds a certificate of return, sighting section 32 subsections 4 of the 2006 electoral act to buttress his matter.

Four other counsel including B. O. Osuigwe, Nwafor Orizu, JR Nduka opposed the application on the ground that it should originate from the Federal High Court, while INEC Counsel, Chief Amechi Nwaiwu [SAN] urged the court to uphold the application based on its merit.

Before adjourning ruling to an undisclosed date, which it said would be communicated to interested parties, chairman of the five-member Panel, Justice J. S Ngwuta, upheld an application from one of the parties, Alex Ogbolu, seeking to withdraw his appeal in the matter. The application was signed by his counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu [SAN].

Other members of the panel include, Justices Kekere Ekun, Jean Omokiri, Audu Aboki and J. Galinje.

Proceedings at the capacity filled courtroom had begun exactly 9.02 am, after a bout between security men and litigants in an attempt to create space in the courtroom.

Outside the courtroom, thousands of supporters and interested persons took over every available space in the court premises with various dancing groups, which sang praises in support of Uba.