S’Court Verdict ‘ll Haunt Electoral Jurisprudence -Justice Nweze …Verdict, An Endorsement Of Electoral Fraud, PDP Laments …As Apex Court Declines To Grant Ihedioha’s Appeal

A Supreme Court Justice, Chima Nweze who, yesterday, gave a dissenting judgement stated that the Supreme Court should review its January 14, 2020 ruling that sacked the Imo State governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Hon Emeka Ihedioha from office.
Justice Nweze noted that the Supreme Court is permitted by law to overrule itself.
“The reasoning in the judgment will sooner or later haunt our electoral jurisprudence,” Nweze said.
Noting the statement is just an opinion, Nweze said his argument is “an appeal to the brooding spirit of the law.”
Buttressing his argument, the lawyer said Uzodinma misled the apex court with the presented election results of the 388 polling units without indicating the votes polled by opposition parties.
He said the presented results can only be considered authentic if it indicates the number of accredited voters in the claimed polling units alongside the votes garnered by opposition parties.
Justice Nweze also recalled how Uzodinma admitted at the election tribunal that he hijacked the result sheets from the Independent National Electoral Commission’s officials and completed the result sheets by himself.
The Supreme Court ruling of January 14, 2020 declared the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Hope Uzodinma as the valid winner of the November, 2019 Governorship election conducted in Imo State; ordering the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Emeka Ihedioha to vacate the office of the governor.
A seven-man panel of the Supreme Court, yesterday, decided on the application by Ihedioha’s lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), that the court should review its judgement.
The panel led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Tanko Muhammad voted six-to-one, with the majority agreeing to dismiss the application.
Reacting, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) said the verdict of the Supreme Court on the review of its judgment on the Imo State governorship election was a disconcerting endorsement of electoral fraud, which places a huge burden on the court and the Lord Justices.
The PDP, however, notes that in the face of the sad verdict, Justice Chima Nweze’s judgment presents a glimpse of hope for the nation’s judiciary.
The PDP, in a statement by its Publicity Secretary, Mr Kola Ologbondiyan, says “What Nigerians expected of the Supreme Court, since the error in its earlier judgment had been fully established, was to summon the courage to affirm its infallibility by correcting the errors and handing over victory to the rightful winner. Sadly, it failed to do so”.
The PDP publicity secretary says the party abides completely by the judgement pronounced by Justice Nweze which he says went straight to the substance of the PDP’s application.
“Our party abides completely by every word of the judgment of Justice Nweze as treated facts, which are truly sacred.
Justice Nweze’s pronouncement, which went straight into the substance of our application represents a universal view about the travesty of justice that occurred in the Imo state governorship election judgment.
“It is indeed unfortunate that the Supreme Court had the wholesome opportunity to redeem itself and correct its errors, but choose to hide behind a technicality to justify and endorse an electoral fraud.
“As a party, we hold that on this judgment, all election stakeholders must rally to create remedies for this pathetic situation created by the Supreme Court in the Imo governorship election before our entire electoral process becomes vanquished.
“This judgment will continue to haunt the Supreme Court. It has created a burden of precedence and fallibility on the court.
“More distressing is the fact that the judgment has heavily detracted from the confidence Nigerians and the international community reposed on the Supreme Court and our entire jurisprudence”.
Also reacting to the judgement, the APC, through its Chairman, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, who expressed delight in the outcome of the review the Imo governorship judgement, noted that the review was just consistent with the Supreme Court’s body language in similar matters that had come up in recent times.
He, however, lashed out at the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) for thinking it could get anything different from the decision of the Supreme Court, pointing out that its candidate, Hon. Emeka Ihedioha failed to get required votes and spread in the election.
“I think it’s refreshing and quite predictable in the sense that from the attitude of the Supreme Court last week on Bayelsa that nothing was wrong with the candidate, the lower court did not disqualify the candidate, the issue of the candidate was not before the Supreme Court and yet the Supreme Court made a decision which we thought that benefited from in the words of Mr Wole Olanikpekun, some human corrections and the court says no whatever they have done was final.
The Supreme Court, yesterday, declined to restore Hon Emeka Ihedioha of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as the governor of Imo State.
The apex court, in a decision by a seven-man panel of Justices led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Tanko Muhammad, reinstated the judgement it gave on January 14, which declared Hope Uzodinma of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the validly elected governor of Imo State.
In the lead verdict that was delivered by Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, the apex court, held that Ihedioha’s application to set-aside the judgement that removed him from office lacked merit.
It held that the application was an invitation for the Supreme Court to sit on appeal over its own final judgement.
Though it dismissed the application, the apex court refused to award cost against the Applicants.
However, a member of the apex court panel, Justice Centus Nweze, disagreed with the lead verdict, and gave a dissenting opinion that allowed Ihedioha’s application.
Nweze said he was satisfied that the judgement that declared Uzodinma winner was entered in error.
He held that the apex court has a duty to, in the interest of justice, set-aside its decision that was given in error.