Posted by By ROSE EJEMBI, Makurdi on
As the Supreme Court is set to give reasons for its judgement on the celebrated constitutional tenure of governors tomorrow, indications have emerged that the camp of Mr Andy Uba, who lost the case to the Anambra State Governor, Peter Obi, plans to apply for its review.
…As S'Court gives reasons tomorrow
As the Supreme Court is set to give reasons for its judgement on the celebrated constitutional tenure of governors tomorrow, indications have emerged that the camp of Mr Andy Uba, who lost the case to the Anambra State Governor, Peter Obi, plans to apply for its review.
The apex court, in its decision which restored Obi as governor till 2010, had affirmed that the four-year term of a governor began from the date of his inauguration.
The court's landmark verdict sent Uba, who was elected in the April governorship election packing from the Government House last month.
However, Daily Sun gathered that Uba's camp has refused to accept the reality of the judgment. First, it has tried to construe it to mean that Mr.Uba will take over at the completion of Obi's tenure.
Investigations revealed that soon after Senior Advocate, Chief Gani Fawehinmi's support of INEC's position that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction on the matter, Uba's supporters urged on by a highly placed judicial officer, who is closely connected to Uba quickly began moves to seek the review of the case to enable Uba to come back as the governor. The camp is said to have mobilized a battery of lawyers for what promises to be another 'forensic battle."
Daily Sun's checks, however, revealed that all is not well in the camp as the assembled lawyers could not all agree on the position. About three of them, all senior advocates are said to have canvassed the argument that the mere fact that the judgment was unanimous did not encourage application for a review as it would somewhat amount to disregard and disrespect, not just for the justices that decided the case, but for the entire court. They are said not to be comfortable considering the worldwide, tumultuous celebrations that followed the case.
When contacted on phone on the matter, Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN) said: 'Honestly, I am stunned to hear that a competent, qualified lawyer would consent to apply for the review of the unanimous decision of seven Justices of the Supreme Court. It is pathetic if some people are thinking along that line especially when the court is yet to give its reasons.
It is the height of foolishness for anybody to think that the Supreme Court, which arrived at a weighty and monumental judgment in the nation's political history, will turn round and upturn itself due to the accusation of lack of jurisdiction. It is an insult to insinuate that the court does not know cases within its jurisdiction. Who is wiser and more knowledgeable in law than the justices of the Supreme Court? Even speaking from common sense, any move for a review should be viewed as an attempt to make the Court look stupid. It is contemptuous," Sagay said concluding, that: 'I wish and pray that the move is not true."
Commenting on the matter, Mr. Bamidele Aturu, a lawyer and human rights activist said: 'Such an application, if it is true, will be an abuse of court process.
The Supreme Court will not waste time throwing it out. As a matter of fact, lawyers who file foolish and unjustifiable applications should be removed from legal practitioners' list. It is pure, unadulterated madness to think along that direction."
In his own reaction, Robinson Alikwe of Excellence Chamber said that though the Supreme Court can, on application, review its judgment, was inconceivable to imagine that seven justices of the Supreme Court can fall into error on an issue bordering on jurisdiction.
He said that the move was just the mirror of Uba's desperation to be governor. 'Why don't they wait for the reasons behind the judgment before contemplating an application for a review? This shows that they have not accepted the reality of the judgment - they are in a dream land and need to be
pitied," he added.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is set to give reasons for the judgment tomorrow.