News
Rivers Guber: Set Aside Tribunal Judgement, Wike, INEC Urge Court
The Rivers State Governor, Chief Nyesom Wike, has filed an appeal at the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, asking the court to set aside the judgment of the Rivers State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal, which nullified his election on October 24, 2015.
In a notice of appeal dated November 3, 2015, and filed same day by his lawyer, Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), the governor raised 26 grounds of appeal upon which he sought to set aside the tribunal judgment.
The governor is challenging the entire judgment.
He joined the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its governorship candidate in Rivers State, Dr. Dakuku Peterside, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), as respondents.
He asked the court to allow the appeal and to make an order setting aside the judgment/decision of the Rivers State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal.
He further urged the Court of Appeal to make an “order striking out or dismissing the petition filed on May 3, 2015 by Peterside and the APC.”
The governor in his notice of appeal stated: “Take notice that the appellant being dissatisfied with the decision of the Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal for Rivers State sitting in Abuja, contained in the judgment of the tribunal led by Justice Suleiman Ambrosa (chairman), Justice Wesley Ibrahim Leha (member) and Hon. Justice Bayo Taiwo (member ) sitting in Court No. 23 of the FCT High Court dated October 24, 2015, doth hereby appeal to the Court of Appeal upon the grounds set out in paragraph 3, and will at the hearing, seek the reliefs set out in paragraph 4.”
Wike, among other grounds, noted that the tribunal erred in law when it relied on hearsay and inadmissible evidence to nullify his election.
He added that the finding and conclusion of the tribunal was not supported by evidence before the court.
The governor stated in his notice of appeal: “The Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal for Rivers State erred in law when it refused to follow the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kakih vs PDP (2014) 5 NWLR which was duly cited to it to the effect that a party who makes non-voting or misconduct of an election the pivot of his case must call at least one disenfranchised voter from each of the polling booths or units or stations in the constituency.”
Wike also faulted the tribunal’s decision nullifying his election on the basis of card reader accreditation even though the Electoral Act recognised manual accreditation.
According to him, the proof of accreditation of voters under the law is by the production of the register of voters bearing the indications of the presiding officer as to the persons accredited to vote and not by card reader report.
The governor said: “The tribunal wrongly neglected, failed and refused to abide by and follow the binding decision of the Court of Appeal in APC vs Olujimi Agbaje : Appeal No: CA/L/EP/GOV./751A/2015 (unreported ) delivered on 26th August, which was duly cited to it and thereby came to a wrong conclusion.”
He added that the petitioners at the tribunal failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action against the respondents and the tribunal failed to conduct a pre-trial conference after the removal of the first chairman, hence the tribunal erred in its judgment.
The governor stated: “The tribunal wrongly countenanced the testimony of delegates of subpoenaed witnesses which basically constitutes an indirect alteration of or addition to the statement of facts of the petition without the leave of the court. The testimonies of these witnesses run counter to the pleaded case of the petitioners and contradict the rest of the evidence of the petitioners’ witnesses in several material particulars.”
Similarly, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), has also filed an appeal against the judgment of the Rivers State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal nullifying the election of Governor Nyesom Wike.
The electoral body filed her appeal dated 4th of November, 2015, at the Court of Appeal, Abuja Judicial Division on 5th November, 2015.
In a 12-ground appeal filed on behalf of INEC by her counsel, Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, the electoral body challenged the entirety of the tribunal’s judgment.
The reliefs sought by INEC in her appeal include: “an order allowing the appeal, an order setting aside the decision of the tribunal and an order dismissing the petition as lacking in merit”.
According to INEC, the learned justices of the tribunal erred in law when it failed to evaluate the evidence of each of the witnesses called by the petitioners before reaching its decision.
INEC stated that: “The tribunal was obligated to making findings as to where elections were said to have held on the one part and where they were alleged not to have held on the other part”.
The electoral body further stated that the tribunal erred when it resorted to generic declaration like “many instances”, when the justices were obligated to specify where the evidence elicited under cross examination enhanced the case of the first and second respondents.
The INEC further stated that the tribunal erred when it used the testimonies of witnesses who were not at polling stations to nullify the Rivers State governorship election.
INEC, in her appeal, stated that: “Evidence of reports at an election by persons who did not make them and who did not observe the proceedings, the subject matter of the reports cannot be substitute for evidence of witnesses in the polling units of Rivers State.
“Exhibits A303-A305, A307 and A2 are documentary hearsay, which ought not to be relied upon as proof of the allegations of non-conduct and improper conduct of election in the polling units in Rivers State”.
INEC stated that the tribunal disregarded Section 49 (1) and (2) of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended, which is a statutory provision binding on it, and further added that the decision of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal on the law, were duly cited to the tribunal, but it ignored same.
According to INEC, there was no due evaluation of the 56 witnesses called by the petitioners, pointing out that the witnesses who testified did not link their testimonies to the documents tendered.
INEC added that the tribunal erred in law when it failed to indicate that the petitioners failed to prove their case on a polling unit by polling unit basis as required by law.
The electoral body added that the tribunal erred when it failed to demonstrate the reasons why it rejected the evidences professed by witnesses of INEC, PDP and Wike.
News
Bill For Compulsory Counselling For Convicted Corrupt Nigerians Scales Second Reading
A bill to amend the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000 has passed its second reading in the House of Representatives.
The bill, which mandates compulsory counselling and training for individuals convicted of corruption-related offences, was sponsored by Kayode Akiolu (APC-Lagos) during plenary on Wednesday.
Leading the debate, Mr Akiolu explained that the bill sought to amend Section 67 of the principal act, introducing new provisions that were not part of the original section.
“These additional provisions, found in subsections 2, 3, and 4 of the amendment bill, require judges and magistrates to not only impose imprisonment and/or fines on those convicted of corruption but also mandate a minimum four-week anti-corruption counselling and training.
“The counselling and training will be designed and delivered by the Anti-Corruption Academy of Nigeria (ACAN) and aims to address the psychological factors related to corrupt behaviour,” Mr Akiolu said.
Mr Akiolu emphasised that the training would help reform convicts by addressing their corrupt tendencies and could even transform them into advocates for anti-corruption efforts.
He added that this approach aligned with the reformative aspect of the criminal justice system, which focused on punishment and rehabilitation.
“As per subsection 4, the bill allows magistrates and judges to order convicts to cover the cost of their counselling and training, preventing additional financial burdens on the government,” the lawmaker noted.
Mr Akiolu further argued that if the bill is passed into law, it would strengthen the country’s fight against corruption.
Given the widespread negative impact of corruption, he urged the House to support the bill for the country’s benefit.
Following the debate, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas referred the bill to the relevant committee for further legislative consideration.
News
Judiciary, Media Key Pillars Of Democracy, Says CJN
The Judiciary and the Media are key pillars of democracy, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has said.
Kekere-Ekun made this statement in her address at the 2024 National Conference of the National Association of Judiciary Correspondents (NAJUC).
The CJN was represented by Mr Abdulaziz Olumo, the Secretary of the National Judicial Institute (NJI).
“ The judiciary and the media occupy unique and complementary roles in any democratic society.
“ The judiciary serves as the guardian of justice, equity, and the rule of law, the media acts as the conscience of society, disseminating information, shaping public opinion, and ensuring accountability.
“ Together, these institutions provide checks and balances that strengthen the fabric of democracy,” she said.
Quoting Felix Frankfurter, a former U.S. Supreme Court Justice, she said: free press is not to be preferred to an independent judiciary, nor an independent judiciary to a free press. Neither has primacy over the other; both are indispensable to a free society.”
The CJN said this dynamic interdependence between the judiciary and the media presents opportunities and challenges alike.
“ The media is entrusted with the responsibility of informing the public about judicial activities, the judiciary relies on accurate and ethical reportage to enhance public confidence in its work.
“ However, the inherent power of the media to influence public opinion requires careful management, especially when its focus turns to judicial proceedings.
“ The question posed by Robert J.Cordy, a former Associate Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, is pertinent here: “What happens when the free press turns its sights on the courts-scrutinizing, sensationalizing, and exposing the frailties of the judiciary while questioning its ethical standards and performance?”
“The media’s capacity to shape narratives and perceptions is undeniable” she said.
Quoting Jim Morrison , she said “Whoever controls the media controls the mind.”
According to her, this underscores the immense responsibility placed on journalists to report truthfully, fairly, and objectively.
“ Unfortunately, the commercialisation of news and external influences have led to the rise of sensationalism-a practice that distorts facts, erodes trust, and undermines the very essence of journalism.
“ Sensationalised headlines, such as the infamous 2016 headline “We raided the houses of ‘corrupt, unholy’ judges, says DSS,” can paint a skewed picture of the judiciary and its officers. Such reporting, often devoid of context, compromises the integrity of the justice system and misleads the public.
“ Closely tied to this is the issue of “trial by media,” where premature and often biased media narratives prejudge cases and infringe on the constitutional rights of individuals” she said.
She added that as Mahatma Gandhi rightly observed, “The sole aim of journalism should be service.” It is imperative for media practitioners to remain steadfast in their commitment to truth and objectivity.
To this end, she advised, the National Association of Judiciary Correspondents to take proactive steps to regulate the activities of its members.
“ This is not merely about enforcing rules but about fostering professionalism and safeguarding the credibility of the media.
“ The judiciary and the media must work as partners in progress.
“ To bridge the gap between these institutions, there is a pressing need for constructive engagement and mutual understanding.
“ Courts can provide the media with guidelines on judicial processes, courtroom decorum, and the nuances of court proceedings.
She noted that globally, courts have adopted initiatives to support the media’s role in reporting judicial matters.
For instance, she said the Supreme Court of Dakota’s media guide outlines protocols for courtroom reporting, while the UK ‘s Media Guidance document provides clarity on access and etiquette for journalists.
“ These examples demonstrate how structured collaboration can enhance the quality of judicial reportage.
“ In Nigeria, we can take a cue from these models by developing a comprehensive media guide tailored to our judicial landscape.
“ This initiative, which would involve inputs from NAJUC and judicial stakeholders, would not only enhance media access to courtrooms but also ensure that judicial activities are accurately and responsibly reported” she said.
She advocated that judiciary correspondents must make deliberate efforts to familiarise themselves with the rules and procedures of the courts.
She added that understanding these frameworks will enable journalists to navigate the complexities of judicial proceedings effectively and responsibly.
“ Training programs such as this conference play a crucial role in equipping judiciary correspondents with the knowledge and skills needed to report judicial matters accurately.
“ The theme of this year’s conference, “The Role of Courts in Enforcement of Judgments,” is both timely and significant, as it addresses an aspect of judicial work that is critical to upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice.
“ I commend NAJUC for its commitment to promoting accountability and transparency through its engagements with the judiciary.
“ As I conclude, I must emphasize the importance of credible journalism in strengthening public trust in the judiciary” she said.
She urged judiciary correspondents to prioritise the pursuit of truth and objectivity, resist undue influences, and remain steadfast in their commitment to ethical standards.
She commended the leadership of NAJUC, under the chairmanship of Mr Kayode Lawal, for its efforts in promoting professionalism among judiciary correspondents.
News
Senate Issues Arrest Warrant Against Julius Berger MD Over Road Project
The Senate has issued an arrest warrant for the Managing Director of Julius Berger Nigeria Plc, Dr Peer Lubasch, to appear before its Committee on Works.
The Tide’s source reports that the warrant was for Lubasch to explain the utilisation of funds appropriated for the reconstruction work on Calabar-Odukpani-Itu highway.
The warrant followed the adoption of a motion sponsored by Sen. Osita Ngwu (PDP- Enugu) and co-sponsored by Sen. Asuquo Ekpenyong (APC-Cross River) and Sen. Mpigi Barinada (PDP- Rivers) at plenary in Abuja, yesterday.
Ngwu, in the motion said, that the senate had mandated the committee on works to conduct investigation into the state of road infrastructure across the country.
He said that in furtherance to the investigative hearings, Julius Berger refused to honour invitations to provide details of its role in the Calabar-Odukpani-Itu highway project, in spite of receiving substantial public funds.
He said that this was worrisome, given the alarming discrepancies in performance among contractors on the project, with specific reference to Julius Berger for failing to meet delivery timelines.
Ngwu said it was the constitutional powers of the National Assembly under Sections 8 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, to conduct investigations on any person or organisation responsible for administering public funds.
He said that the powers set out in section 6 of the legislative powers and privileges act empowered the Senate to issue warrants of arrest on persons in contempt of its proceedings.
The Tide source reports that the senate further ruled that President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, should sign the warrant, mandating the Julius Berger managing director to appear on a date to be communicated.
Akpabio said that the senate’s decision was in line with its constitutional powers under Section 89 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
“This senate will not tolerate the continued disregard of its authority.
“The managing director of Julius Berger must appear before the relevant committee, failing which further actions will be taken as prescribed by the constitution.
“The point of order, which was supported by the majority of the senators, highlighted the importance of upholding the integrity of the legislature.
“The senate committee will submit its findings to the National Assembly after the MD’s appearance.
“If there is any further failure to comply, we shall take the necessary steps to ensure respect for the constitution and the rule of law,” Akpabio said.
-
Politics4 days ago
Why My Seat Should Not Be Declared Vacant By PDP – Ibori-Suenu
-
Maritime4 days ago
Private Sector Should Drive Blue Economy -Bello
-
Sports4 hours ago
NBF Announces Olympics Preparation Date
-
Nation2 hours ago
Community Organises Civic Reception For LG Boss
-
News4 days ago
Navy Deploys 15 Warships, Three Helicopters To Boost Oil Production In N’Delta
-
Rivers8 hours ago
Expert Advocates IT Driven Security In Rivers
-
News4 hours ago
Tinubu To Present 2025 Budget To NASS Dec 17
-
Oil & Energy4 days ago
NNPC Begins Export From PH Refinery