Again, Supreme Court Shifts To Tuesday Hearing in Ihedioha’s Judgment Review Bid

By Yemi Oyeyemi, Abuja
The Supreme Court has for the second time adjourned hearing in the request by the former Governor of Imo State, Honourable Emeka Ihedioha, for a reversal of his sack by the apex court.
The adjournment was sequel to a request by lead counsel to Ihedioha, Chief Kanu Agabi SAN, for time to study another process served on him inside the court by a respondent in the matter.
Ihedioha in the application filed on February 6 is asking the apex court to set aside the judgment sacking him as governor on the grounds that the judgment was a nullity because it was procured by fraud.
However when the matter was called on February 18, Ihedioha’s lawyer, Chief Agabi SAN, had asked for a short adjournment to enable him respond to the process of the All Progressive Congress (APC) and the Imo Governor, Senator Hope Uzodinma who are first and second respondents in the case.
His request was accordingly granted and the seven member panel of Justices of the Supreme Court led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Ibrahim Muhammad, adjourned hearing till March 2, 2020.
However, when the matter was called, Chief Agabi SAN again informed the court that he was only served this morning inside the court with the reply of the respondents and will need to look at the documents in order to respond accordingly.
Although, counsel to the All Progressive Congress (APC) and Imo State Governor, Senator Hope Uzodinma, Mr Damian Dodo SAN, and that of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr Tanimu Inuwa SAN, had indicated their readiness to proceed with the hearing, the CJN however adjourned the matter to March 3, as requested by the applicants.
The Supreme Court had on January 14, 2020 ordered the removal of Ihedioha from office on the grounds that he did not win majority of votes cast in the March 9, 2019 governorship election in Imo State.
INEC had last year March declared Ihedioha as winner of the governorship election on the ground that he won majority of lawful votes cast at the governorship poll.
The Imo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal and the Court of Appeal in their concurrent decisions in the appeal filed by Senator Uzodinma, also upheld Ihedioha’s election and dismissed the petition on grounds that Uzodinma did not prove his allegations against the election of Ihedioha.
But the apex court in its judgment held otherwise and declared Senator Uzodinma as the winner upon the computation of results in the disputed 388 polling units.
The court in its judgment delivered by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun disagreed with the decisions of the appeal court on the grounds that they erred in law when they excluded votes from 388 polling units from the total scores at the poll.
According to the apex court, when the excluded votes totalling over 200,000 were added, Uzodinma and not Ihedioha actually won majority of the lawful votes cast in the March 9 governorship election in Imo State.
The apex court consequently declared Uzodinma Governor of Imo State and ordered the INEC to withdraw the earlier certificate of return issued to Ihedioha and issued a fresh one to Uzodinma.
The court accordingly ordered that Senator Uzodinma, candidate of the APC which came fourth in the election be sworn in as Governor of Imo State.
But Ihedioha in his current application said that the apex court was misled in the election results computation and in the decision which removed him from office as governor.
He clarified that his application before the apex court was not in any way seeking review of the court’s judgment or asking the apex court to sit on appeal over its judgment.
He explained that his application is seeking the court “to set aside its January 14, 2020 that removed him from office for being a nullity.
“The application is not an academic exercise or an invitation to this honourable Court to answer hypothetical questions as the issue of nullity of the judgment of January 14, 2020 is neither academic nor hypothetical.
“Contrary to the deposition by Governor Hope Uzodinma, he (Uzodinma) never stated the results of the other 68 candidates that participated in the election at the 388 polling units, as their scores were not indicated anywhere by the appellants”, he said in the latest affidavit.
He further argued that contrary to the depositions by the respondents, there is nowhere in the judgment of the apex court delivered on January 14, 2020 in which the decision of the lower court striking out the petition for incompetence was set aside or upturned.
However, Senator Uzodinma on his part urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the appeal for lacking in merit and a waste of the court’s time having been caught up with section 285 of the 1999 constitution, which provides a 60 days life span for the hearing and determination of the appeal.
Uzodinma and the APC who are 1st and 2nd respondents respectively, in their reply to Ihedioha’s motion claimed that the request is nothing but a mere academic exercise and an affront to the 1999 constitution.
In a 19 paragraphs affidavit filed in opposition to Ihedioha’s application, the governor and his party asserted that the 60 days allowed for the Supreme Court by the Constitution has since lapsed.
“The undisputed facts relating to the Respondents/Applicants’ Motion hereinafter referred to as “the motion” are to the effect that the judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered on 21st September, 2019 while the one sought to be set aside was delivered on 14th January, 2020. Clearly, the 60 days allowed by Section 285(7) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) for this Honourable Court to hear and determine appeal from the Court of Appeal in an election matter, lapsed on 17th January, 2020. The Motion to set aside was filed on 5th February, 2020, 19 days after the time allowed by the Constitution.
“It is now a settled law that the 60 days time limit to determine and conclude litigation on election matters is sacrosanct and cannot be extended by any guise”, they insisted in the counter affidavit filed on their behalf by their lawyer, Mr Damian Dodo SAN.
Meanwhile the court has also adjourned hearing in the Zamfara State APC case to March 17 to enable the applicant effect service of the suit on all parties.
Respondents in the suit include Senator Kabiru Marafa and 180 Zamfara APC candidates in the 2019 general election.
The APC is asking the apex court to review the consequential order which gave rise to the swearing in of candidates of the PDP into office from governorship to national and state house of assembly positions.
The apex court had in its judgment last year voided the participation of the APC in the 2019 general election in Zamfara State due to the party’s inability to conduct primary election as required by the law.
The court having declared all votes cast for the APC in various elective positions in the state as wasted votes, ordered that candidates of the party with the highest number of votes and spread be sworn in as Governor, Senators, House of Representatives members as well as members of the Zamfara State House of Assembly.
However, when the matter was called, it was discovered that some respondents in the suit were yet to be served with the Court’s processes as they were not in court nor represented by lawyer.
Although counsel to the APC, Chief Robert Clarke SAN, informed the court that an affidavit of service on all respondents has been filed, the CJN however said that there was no evidence to that effect since the affidavit was not in the Court’s record.
Chief Clarke accordingly asked for a short adjournment to enable him do the needful.
Since the request was not opposed by counsel to the respondents, Chief Mike Ozekhome SAN, the Presiding Justice, subsequently adjourned till March 17 for hearing.