Again, Supreme Court Strikes Out HDP’s Appeal Against Buhari’s Election

Tribunal Reserves Judgment In HDP’s Petition Against Buhari’s Election

The Supreme Court has again struck out an appeal filed by the Hope Democratic Party (HDP) and its presidential candidate, Ambrose Owuru, to challenge the declaration of President Muhammadu Buhari as the winner of the February 23 presidential election.

The apex court struck out the appeal on Monday following the withdrawal of an application praying for the restoration of the appeal to be heard afresh.

Mr Owuru and HDP had sought for leave of the court to allow them bring back their appeal which had been struck out due to the filling of two notices of appeal in respect of one matter which was against the provisions of the law.

When the matter came up Monday, the apex court panel led by Justice Olukayode Ariwoola drew the attention of counsel to the appellants, Mr Sunday Ezema, to Section 285 (7) of the 1999 Constitution and was asked whether the appeal has not become statute-barred.

Although the counsel initially insisted the appeal could still be heard, he, however, made a dramatic U-turn and applied for withdrawal of the application.

Justice Ariwoola who led four other justices in a short ruling then struck out the application.

But he declined to award cost against the appellants as demanded by counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mr Yunus Usman, and that of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Yakubu Maikyau.

On his part, President Buhari’s counsel, Mr Wole Olanipekun, did not ask for cost against the two appellants.

He had objected to the application of the appellants to hear their appeal afresh on the grounds that time to do so had lapsed, and it became statute-barred and that the court no longer has jurisdiction.

Olanipekun argued that the appellants were not fair to the court by engaging it ‘in a non-justiciable’ application that would serve no purpose other than wasting precious time of the court.

The position was adopted by counsels to INEC and APC but with a demand for substantial cost against the appellants for wasting the time of the court with the frivolous application.

In the ruling, Justice Ariwoola agreed that the application of the appellants had been caught up by Section 285 of the 1999 Constitution and as such, no longer has a life to maintain it.

HDP had filed a fresh motion to challenge the way and manners its appeal against President Buhari’s election was determined and struck out on what it called technicality rather than the merit of law.

The party, in the new motion, had asked the apex court to reverse itself in the ruling delivered on October 3 and restore the appeal for fresh heading on merit rather than on technicality of filing two notices of appeal together in one matter.

In the fresh motion on notice brought pursuant to Order 8 Rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules and Sections 6 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution, as well as Section 22 of the Supreme Court Act, the party and Owuru claimed that the judgment delivered by Justice Mary Peter-Odili in favour of Buhari was invalid on the ground that it was based on technicalities of law rather than merit and justice.

The motion filed by Mr Chukwunonyerem Njoku on behalf of the appellants pleaded with the court to restore their appeal for a fresh hearing.

HDP and its candidate maintained that the striking out of their appeal on the technical ground was without compliance with the mandatory procedure of law.

The apex court had on October 3 struck out HDP’s appeal on the grounds that more than one notice of appeal was filed in the same appeal contrary to the provisions of law.

Justice Odili who delivered the verdict had also held that Owuru and HDP failed to appeal against the ruling delivered by the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal on August 22 which struck out their petition based on the lack of jurisdiction.

In their petition at the Tribunal, they had prayed for nullification of the February 23 election on the ground that its shift from February 16 by INEC to February 23 was not in compliance with any law and as such a nullity.

The two appellants claimed that a referendum election was conducted by Nigerians on February I6 and won by them with over 50 million voice votes and that the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) should be ordered to inaugurate their candidate as President of Nigeria based on the referendum election results.

Trending

Leave a Reply