Politics
S’Court Reserves Judgment On Nasarawa, Kebbi Gov’ship Tussles
The Supreme Court, yesterday, reserved its judgments on appeals that are challenging the outcome of the last governorship elections in Nasarawa and Kebbi States.
A five-member panel of the apex court led by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, okayed appeals from the two States for judgment, after all the parties presented their cases and adopted their briefs of argument.
It would be recalled that the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal had on November 23, reversed the tribunal judgment that sacked Governor Abdullahi Sule of Nasarawa State.
The appellate court held that the tribunal erred in law when it concluded that governor Sule of the All Progressives Congress, APC, did not win the majority of lawful votes that were cast in the election.
In the lead verdict that was delivered by Justice Uchechukwu Onuemenam, the appellate court held that the record before it established that the tribunal relied on legally inadmissible evidence to declare the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, David Ombugadu, as the valid winner of the governorship election that held in the state on March 18.
According to the appellate court, the tribunal wrongly relied on the evidence of eight of the witnesses that were produced by the PDP candidate, whose witness statements on oath were not front-loaded alongside the petition.
It stressed that under Section 285(5) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, section 132(7) of the Electoral Act 2022 and Paragraphs 4(5) (6) and 14(2) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, every written statement on oath must be filed alongside the petition, within the statutorily allocated time.
The appellate court struck out all the evidence and exhibits that were tendered before the tribunal by the eight witnesses.
It held that the evidence of 12 remaining witnesses that testified for the PDP candidate were not sufficient to sustain the judgement of the tribunal.
More so, the appellate court held that the tribunal was in error, when it deducted a total of 1, 868 votes that were credited to governor Sule, on the premise that over-voting occured in four polling units.
It held that the tribunal was wrong in its decision since the petitioners did not provide necessary documents needed to prove over-voting.
It held that the tribunal acted wrongly when it recomputed votes and made the declaration that returned the PDP candidate as winner of the election.
Consequently, the court vacated the order of the tribunal that directed the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to withdraw the Certificate of Return that was issued to governor Sule of the APC and issue a fresh one to Ombugadu of the PDP.
Dissatisfied with the judgment of the appellate court, the PDP and its candidate approached the Supreme Court to set it aside.
The Appellants, yesterday, urged the apex court to reinstate the majority decision of the tribunal which recognised them as valid winners of the gubernatorial poll.
Meanwhile, in the Kebbi State dispute, the PDP and its candidate, Aminu Bande, are urging the apex court to nullify the November 24, 2023, judgement of the Court of Appeal in Abuja, which upheld the election of Governor Nasir Idris who was the flagbearer of the APC.
They contended that the appellate court wrongly dismissed their appeal after it affirmed the decision of Kebbi State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which gave victory to Governor Idris.
The appellate court had maintained that the PDP and its candidate failed to establish all the allegations they raised in their petition.
The court stressed that the allegation of forgery levelled against the Deputy Governor of the state, Abubakar Tafida, was not proved as required by the law.
It further held that the issues of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act in the conduct of the election could not stand since the Appellants failed to show how it substantially affected the outcome of the poll.
It will be recalled that INEC had declared the Kebbi State governorship election inconclusive owing to massive vote cancellation and over voting in 20 of the 21 LGAs in the state.
The Commission subsequently conducted a supplementary election on April 15, at the end of which it declared that governor Idris of the APC polled 409,225 votes to beat Bande of the PDP who got 360,940 votes.
Not happy with the outcome of the election, the PDP and its candidate approached the tribunal to challenge the result.
However, the Justice Ofem Ofem-led tribunal dismissed the petition as lacking in merit.
The Supreme Court, yesterday, said it would communicate its judgment date to all the parties.
The state chairman of the party, Dr Babandi Gumel, disclosed this in a statement signed and made available to journalists on Saturday.
According to the statement, the Jigawa PDP received news of Alhaji Lamido’s suspension with “profound shock and disappointment”.
The statement added that the suspension, which was reportedly based on allegations that Alhaji Lamido attended meetings capable of undermining party unity, amounts to an affront to justice, internal democracy and the reconciliation efforts recently championed by the PDP leadership.
The party stressed that the exercise of legal and constitutional rights within the party should not be interpreted as an act of disunity. It recalled that Alhaji Lamido approached the court after he was allegedly denied the opportunity to purchase a nomination form to contest the position of National Chairman of the PDP.
The statement further noted that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled in Alhaji Lamido’s favour by restraining the PDP from proceeding with its national convention until his right to contest was determined.
The Jigawa PDP argued that the suspension appeared to be a punitive action against Alhaji Lamido for seeking judicial redress over an issue on which the court had already found merit.
The party also faulted the decision of the BoT for contradicting recent public statements by its chairman, Senator Adolphus Wabara, who had emphasised reconciliation within the party, admitted past mistakes and appealed to aggrieved members to return fully to the PDP fold.
However, it maintained that suspending a founding member who sought justice through legal means runs contrary to the spirit of reconciliation and healing publicly advocated by the party leadership.
The chairman said the suspension was premature and prejudicial, as the matter remains before the courts. He also described Alhaji Lamido as one of the few founding fathers of the PDP who has remained loyal to the party without defecting, warning that punishing such loyalty sends a negative signal to other committed members.
The party further argued that the action undermines party unity at a time when the PDP requires cohesion to effectively challenge the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). It also insisted that there is no provision in the PDP constitution that allows for the suspension of a “life member”.
The party called on the BoT to immediately and unconditionally withdraw the suspension of Alhaji Lamido.
It also demanded that the BoT publicly affirm the right of all party members to aspire to leadership positions in line with the party’s constitution and the laws of the country, without fear of victimisation.
It further urged the BoT to retrace its steps, align its actions with its reconciliation agenda, and tender an apology to Alhaji Lamido.
The Jigawa PDP reaffirmed its commitment to a united, democratic and law-abiding Party.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, CISLAC warned that if proven, such actions would amount to a serious breach of constitutional order, legislative integrity, and public trust.
The organisation noted that Nigeria’s law-making process is clearly defined by the Constitution, stressing that any alteration of a bill after parliamentary passage undermines democratic governance and the principle of separation of powers.
CISLAC further emphasised that taxation has direct implications for citizens, businesses, sub-national governments, and the overall economy. It stated that uncertainty or a lack of transparency in tax legislation could erode investor confidence and raise concerns about accountability and the possible abuse of executive power.
The organisation described the situation as particularly troubling given the rare inclusive, and thorough public consultation that shaped the law’s final provisions prior to its passage.
“This process brought together taxpayers, civil society groups, professional organisations, the private sector, labour unions, local governments, and technical experts, ensuring that diverse viewpoints were considered and carefully balanced.
“Any unilateral changes to these agreed-upon provisions, made outside the established legislative process and without renewed public engagement, not only breach public trust but also violate the fundamental tax principle of representation, which holds that citizens must have a meaningful voice in shaping the laws that govern how they are taxed. Such actions undermine democratic accountability, weaken the legitimacy of the tax system, and risk eroding public confidence”, it noted.
CISLAC expressed particular concern that uncertainty surrounding the authenticity of the tax law, coming at a time when a new tax regime is expected to take effect, could exacerbate the economic hardship already faced by many Nigerians.
It observed that citizens are contending with rising living costs, inflationary pressures, declining purchasing power, and reduced access to basic services, warning that implementing a disputed tax framework under such conditions, risks deepening inequality, discouraging compliance, and fuelling public resentment.
The organisation stressed that tax reforms must be anchored in clarity, legality, fairness, and social sensitivity, cautioning that any tax system introduced without full transparency, adequate public communication, and legislative certainty undermines voluntary compliance and weakens the social contract between the state and its citizens.
As part of its recommendations, CISLAC called on the Presidency to urgently publish the exact version of the tax law assented to, alongside the authenticated copy passed by the National Assembly, to allow for public and institutional verification.
It also urged the leadership of the National Assembly to promptly exercise its oversight powers to determine whether the assented law reflects the will of the legislature, including a review of the enrolled bill process.
The organisation maintained that any discrepancy discovered should be treated as unconstitutional and addressed through lawful means, such as the re-transmission of the correct bill or judicial interpretation where necessary. It further called for an independent review of the process by relevant institutions, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and, where required, the judiciary, to establish the facts and assign responsibility.
CISLAC noted that the controversy highlights the urgent need to strengthen safeguards at the legislative and executive interface. It recommended measures such as digital tracking of bills, public access to enrolled legislation, and more transparent assent procedures.
CISLAC emphasised that the issue is not about partisan politics but about safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions. It warned that allowing any arm of government to unilaterally alter laws passed by another sets a dangerous precedent and weakens constitutional democracy.
The organisation urged all parties involved to act with restraint, openness, and fidelity to the Constitution, noting that Nigerians deserve laws that reflect due process, the public interest, and the collective decisions of their elected representatives.
CISLAC added that it will continue to monitor developments and engage relevant stakeholders to promote accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s governance processes.
