Ugbah Goes Back to Supreme Court - Files 7 Grounds of Appeal - Seeks Declaration as Governor Prof Steve Torkuma Ugbah and the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) who are challenging the declaration and return of Rt. Hon. Gbariel Torwua Suswam by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the Governor of Benue State in the April 26, 2011 governorship election have gone back to the Supreme Court seeking among other reliefs, an order that their petition be heard on the merit as earlier directed by the Supreme Court on November 14, 2011. In a Notice of Appeal, which consists of seven (7) grounds filed by his lead Counsel, Mr. Oluwarotimi O. Akeredolu, SAN, the petitioners are challenging the decision of the Justice Halima Mohammed-led Tribunal on which struck out their petition on the 28th February, 2012. Prof Steve Torkuma Ugbah and the ACN are claiming in one of the Grounds of Appeal that, the lower Tribunal erred in law by placing reliance on the decision in consolidated Appeal Nos. SC1/2012, SC2/2012 ANPP v Mohammed Goni, Shettima v Mohammed Goni of 17/2/2012 in striking out their petition when the said decision was rendered in breach of the mandatory proviso to Section 234 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and rendered void by Section 64 of the Evidence Act 2011 and this error occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice to the appellants. Particulars a) The decision relied upon by the Tribunal was in respect of an appeal on the interpretation or application of the Constitution as provided in Section 233(2)(b) & (e)(iv) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). b) Section 285(6) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) was the focus of interpretation or application in the said consolidated appeals decided on 17/2/2012. c) The Supreme Court shall be constituted of Seven (7) Justices when considering such appeals. d) In the said decision, the Supreme Court was constituted of Five (5) Justices instead of Seven (7) mandatorily prescribed by the proviso to Section 234 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). e) Section 64 of the Evidence Act 2011 permits a party to show that such a judgment was delivered by a court without jurisdiction. The Petitioners have gone further to state before the Supreme Court that The trial Tribunal violated their fundamental right to fair hearing guaranteed by Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) when it struck out their petition in purported compliance with Section 285(6) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as considered by the Supreme Court in Appeal Nos. SC1/2012, SC2/2012 ANPP v Mohammed Goni, Shettima v Mohammed Goni delivered on 17/2/2012 when- a) on 14/11/2011, the Supreme Court had ordered that the petition of the appellants be heard on the merit. b) the appellants were calling witnesses and tendering documents pursuant to the said order of the Supreme Court when on 28/2/2012 the trial Tribunal abruptly terminated the petition by striking same out. c) the appellants had not finished calling witnesses and tendering documents and were yet to close their case when the petition was struck out by the Tribunal. d) the respondents were yet to defend the petition by adducing evidence at the time it was terminated and no decision was reached on the merit. e) in the circumstances, there was no determination of the petition filed by the appellants pursuant to Section 285(6) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) in accordance with Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). and this error occasioned a gross miscarriage of justice to the Petitioners/Appellants. Meanwhile, Prof Steve Torkuma Ugbah and the ACN had filed an appealed to the Court of Appeal to enter judgment against Gabriel Torwua Suswam and the PDP in their favour since Governor Gabriel Torwua Suswam and the PDP had admitted in their replies to the petition that they did not present any certificates to INEC and this made him not qualified to have contested and returned as the Governor of Benue State. This act violates Sections 177(d), 182(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Section 167 of the Evidence Act 2011. No date has been fixed for the determination of both appeals
Posted on: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 11:53:12 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015