Imo:Why My Case Is Different From Bayelsa – Ihedioha

Ahead of the Supreme Court hearing of his application today, March 2, 2020, former governor of Imo State, Emeka Ihedioha, has told the court that the facts and circumstances of his application before the court are different and distinguishable from the one filed by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, David Lyon with respect to Bayelsa State governorship election.
The Supreme Court had adjourned the hearing of Emeka Ihedioha’s application seeking the review of the January 14, 2020 judgement which sacked him as Imo State governor and installed Hope Uzodinma as his replacement, to March 2.
The seven-man panel of the apex court led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Tanko Muhammad, adjourned the hearing after Ihedioha’s lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), told the court that processes were still being filed.
“My lords, processes are still coming in up till this morning, we were still receiving processes. We, therefore, apply for an adjournment to enable all the processes to come in,” Agabi said.
The lawyer representing Uzodinma and his party, the All Progressives Congress, Damian Dodo (SAN), and that of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Taminu Inuwa (SAN), did not oppose the application for adjournment.
The CJN-led panel subsequently adjourned till March 2 for hearing.
However, in between the adjourned date, a similar application brought by the APC and its sacked governor-elect for Bayelsa State, David Lyon and his deputy, Degi-Eremienyo for a reversal of its judgment was dismissed by the court.
In a unanimous judgment, a seven-man panel of Justices of the apex Court headed by Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, dismissed the two different applications that sought the setting aside of the February 13 judgment that went against Lyon and his deputy.
Justice Amina Augie, who delivered the lead judgment described the fresh applications that were filed by Lyon and his deputy, as well as the All Progressives Congress, APC, as “highly vexatious, frivolous and gross abuse of the judicial process”