The Supreme Court, yesterday, adjourned the hearing of the fresh application that sacked the governor of Imo State, Hon Emeka Ihedioha, filed to be restored back to the office, till March 2.
The development came on a day the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Tanko Muhammad, assumed the headship of a seven-man panel of justices of the apex court that would hear the matter.
Also, yesterday, the Supreme Court fixed March 2 to review its judgement that sacked all candidates of the All Progressives Congress (APC) that won various positions in Zamfara State in the 2019 general election.
A five-man panel of justices of the apex court headed by the CJN, Justice Tanko Muhammad, adjourned hearing of the application for a review of the judgement, after it noted that some of the parties were not served.
Aside from the CJN, other justices that participated in the proceedings that led to the January 14 judgement of the apex court that removed Ihedioha and declared Senator Hope Uzodinma of the APC, also made a comeback in the panel.
The other justices in the panel are Kudirat Kekere-Ekun who delivered the lead judgement that sacked Ihedioha, Justices Sylvester Ngwuta, Umani Abba-Aji, Aminu Sanusi, Kayode Ariwola and Amina Augie.
When the case was called up, yesterday, Ihedioha’s legal team led by a former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, applied for a short adjournment to enable them to respond to motions that were served on them.
Neither Uzodinma’s lawyer, Mr Damian Dodo, SAN, nor that of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), opposed the request.
Consequently, the CJN-led panel deferred the hearing of Ihedioha’s request for review of its judgement till March 2.
It would be recalled that the panel had in its verdict that is being challenged by Ihedioha and his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), declared Uzodinma winner of the Imo governorship contest after it noted that some valid votes that accrued to him in 388 polling units were illegally excluded during the computation process.
It held that if the excluded votes were added, Uzodinma, who was the appellant, would have secured the majority of valid votes cast at the governorship election.
The apex court, therefore, ordered INEC, which was the 1st Respondent in the matter, to immediately issue a fresh certificate of return to Uzodinma who came fourth in the election.
Dissatisfied with the decision, Ihedioha, in his fresh five grounds of appeal, contended that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to declare Uzodinma governor in the absence of any proof that votes ascribed to him met the mandatory geographical spread.
Reacting, the APC and PDP, yesterday, aired their opinions regarding the adjournment of the Supreme Court review on the January 14, 2020 judgement till March 2, as requested by the PDP, to respond to motions that were served on them by the APC.
According to the Imo PDP Publicity Secretary, Damian Opara, “APC and Senator Hope Uzodinma filed a motion that was served on the applicants.
“Normally, when you file such motion, they need time to study and respond to it. How can somebody say that they were not prepared in a matter they filed long time ago. The lawyers needed time to study and reply them. We are fully prepared for the matter”.
When asked if his party was in high expectation, he said: “Well, I am not a lawyer but the little I know is that justice will prevail.”
On the other hand, the Imo APC Publicity Secretary, Enyinnaya Onuegbu, said, “The reasons for asking for adjournment was that the processes were still coming in. Maybe, they have filed or they were still supposed to file.
“Yesterday, they filed and served a fresh application, which apparently, the respondents have not responded to.
“What I mean is that the reply that the Senator Hope Uzodinma and APC served on Agabi, probably, the lawyer to the applicant would want to serve further responses.
“But the only thing is that why will they ask for a hearing notice despite knowing that all the processes have not come in. They are asking for a hearing notice and inconvenience the party on the other side.
“But it is allowed for the party on the other side to ask for an adjournment. You see, we did not oppose the application; we conceded to it. Normally, the courts do not have any choice than to consent to such an adjournment”.
When asked if APC was still in high expectation, he said: “We have the judgement of the Supreme Court. The governor has been sworn-in and adjudicating the function of the office, including payment of the civil servants.
“He paid January salaries by January 26; the governor has allowed most unusual contractors appointed by the past administration to continue their contracts.
“We are already in the office, so we do not expect any change because the time to contest any election petition matter in court has come and gone.”
On the issue of the governor yet to arrive in Imo, Onuegbu said: “The governor accompanied the president to Ethiopia, for four to five days; the governor by law is expected to attend Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting on Wednesday.
“The Imo State has a liaison office in Abuja, which is why wherever the governor is that is where the Government House is. The functions of government run smoothly with other appointees and the civil servants. Yes, we should expect the governor home.”
On the Zamfara case, the fresh application was brought by a faction of the APC led by a former governor of the state, Abdulaziz Yari.
Counsel to the Applicants, Chief Robert Clarke, SAN, said his clients were challenging the verdict of the apex court on the basis of its consequential orders that handed victory to candidates of the PDP in the state, which he said rendered the entire judgement a nullity.
The Applicants argued that reliefs the Supreme Court granted in favour of the PDP and its candidates were extraneous to issues that aggrieved members of the APC brought before it for adjudication.
In their fresh application marked SC/377/19, they argued, “That the Consequential Orders made by this Honourable Court in 5 appeals have made non-parties to the appeal to unjustifiably benefit from the outcome of the appeal contrary to age-long decided authorities by this same court, hence, making these non-parties to reap from where they never sowed.
“That the teeming electorate in Zamfara State have been unfairly and unjustifiably denied or deprived of their natural or ordinary outcome of the votes cast by them.”
However, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, who appeared for the Senator Kabiru Marafa-led faction of the APC in Zamfara State, told the apex court that he filed a preliminary objection to challenge the competence of the fresh application.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was cited as the 179th Respondent in the matter.