Posted by From GODWIN TSA, Abuja on
Attempt by the Democratic Peoples Party [DPP] to stop fresh election in Sokoto State hit the brickwall of a Federal High Court which refused the application.
Attempt by the Democratic Peoples Party [DPP] to stop fresh election in Sokoto State hit the brickwall of a Federal High Court which refused the application.
Justice Adamu Bello refused the request on the ground that his jurisdiction to entertain the main suit is been challenged. The court said it would have been a different matter if the issue of jurisdiction had been resolved.
Justice Bello consequently ordered parties in the case to file written addresses in the case, even as he insisted that he would take the multiple preliminary objections, filed to the hearing of the main case together with the substantive suit.
The court has fixed June 6 for adoption of arguments in the case. The DPP had requested the court to stop the ruling party (PDP) from presenting Aliyu Wammako as its candidate in the re-run governorship election in Sokoto State.
Although the court had earlier ordered parties in the case to file written addresses to fast-track hearing of the suit, DPP had, at the resumed hearing of the case, orally applied for the suspension of the fresh poll fixed for Saturday, pending determination of the substantive suit.
Mr. Rickey Tarfa (SAN) led a team of lawyers that represented DPP, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) led a team of lawyers representing Wammako while Olusola Oke represented the ruling PDP in the matter. But as soon as the application was made by DPP through its counsel, Mr. Tarfa, Wammako, INEC and PDP teamed up to oppose the request. According to Olanipekun, representing Wamakko, he said the plaintiff earlier vowed to make sure that the substantive case was dragged to the Supreme Court.
He said he agreed with DPP on its right to stretch the case to the apex court but assuming that the case would take about two years to conclude, he asked whether the election would not be conducted. 'They vowed that this case will get to the Supreme Court. Yes, we agree but assuming that this case lasts for two years before the Supreme Court decides, does it mean that there would be no election for two years when section 191(2) of the 1999 Constitution empowers the speaker of the House to act as governor for just three months? 'I submit that the power of INEC to fix a date for election can't be questioned by any court. So the court can't suspend election as being canvassed. While the court can assume jurisdiction to examine and determine whether you (the judge) have jurisdiction, you cannot in the process make any coercive order inrespect of your jurisdiction being challenged.
'The Supreme Court has said that a court cannot make a coercive order in determining the issue of jurisdiction and this court can't even make any binding order against people who are not before you," Olanipekun said.
'To grant this prayer, you will be suspending the judgment of the Court of Appeal on April 11, as well as the provisions of the constitution. A judgment of the court cannot be interpreted vide originating summons. This relief by the applicants are not grantable."
The court agreed with Wamakko and the PDP as it threw out the request by DPP.