Rivers, Zamfara judgements: Lawyers Disagree on seeking Supreme Court review

Lawyers have disagreed with constitutional lawyer and chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Anti-Corruption, Professor Itse Sagay (SAN), for calling on the All Progressives Congress (APC) to return to the Supreme Court to seek a review of its judgements disqualifying the party in Zamfara and Rivers states.

Tsagay was quoted on Tuesday as describing the apex court’s decisions on the two states a “travesty of justice.”

A Lagos-based human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, faulted Sagay, saying the Supreme Court will not entertain applications on review of judgements delivered on APC primaries in the two states.

Falana noted that since the crises in both Zamfara and Rivers were caused by the problem of godfathers, the APC cannot on moral ground approach the court.

He however called for the review of the Electoral Act in view of the development.

“The concern of Prof Sagay, SAN is understood but the Constitution has prescribed time limits for pre-election cases and election petitions.

To that extent the Supreme Court will not entertain applications for the review of both judgments as they are time barred.

“I recall that the application for the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ugba v Suswan was dismissed while the lawyers were seriously penalised.

However, the decisions of the apex court in both cases calls for a fundamental review of the Electoral Act.

“Since the crises in Rivers and Zamfara were caused by political godfathers, the APC cannot muster the moral courage to ask for review of the judgments as they are.

The system should punish godfathers who subvert internal democracy in the parties by not conducting primaries,’’ Falana said.

Anti-corruption lawyer, Abeny Mohammed (SAN) faulted Sagay’s argument because it would amount to “standing the law on its head.”

He added that the basis for the Supreme Court’s decision was on the requirement of the law for political parties to conduct valid primaries to produce candidates for general elections.

“So it is that illegality by the APC that the Supreme Court has corrected,” he said.

“Sagay is basing his argument on ‘justice for the voters’. But initially, INEC said APC did not conduct primaries and they did not have candidates for the election, so all the votes cast for them were described as ‘wasted votes’.”

Mohammed said though he would have liked the Apex Court to order a new election, allowing the APC to conduct fresh primaries, but the court did not want to “bend the law to favour one political party when others have complied with the Electoral Act and conducted party primaries.”

But the former Legal Adviser to former Head of State, General Sani Abacha, Professor Auwal Hamisu Yadudu, argued that a legal basis for the Supreme Court to review its decision on Zamfara and Rivers states’ elections exists.

Professor Yadudu told Daily Trust on Sunday yesterday that there was the matter was originally pre-election one, saying there was an opportunity for any political party that feels aggrieved from the election to now challenge the issue as an election matter.

“In other words, APC or any other party can now challenge the election results as announced and declared by INEC.

My view is that there is legal basis which can present an opportunity for the Supreme Court to have another look at its decision, however it has to be through an election petition process which can be initiated by a party that is aggrieved because Section 140 of the electoral act says where an election has been voided on account of an ineligibility for any reason of one of the candidates, the court is not entitled to award the verdict to the party that becomes second in terms of number of votes scored.

“I’m saying it would succeed but it is a window through which the decision of the Supreme Court can be reviewed.

Obviously, it would have to start from the election petition tribunal. If a party dissatisfied with the outcome of the judgement, it can move to the Appeal Court and then to the Supreme Court. And I am sure one of the issues that would be canvassed would be that fact that the decision of the Supreme Court in a pre-election dispute is faulty, questionable and should be reviewed in light of justice,” he averred.

Professor Yadudu added that the misrule of the APC leadership in Zamfara and the impunity it showed and its refusal to conduct primary election, for instance, should not be rewarded in a manner that Supreme Court would award victory to another party.

He said: “If the argument that Prof Sagay has canvassed would be listen to, the least the tribunal or a court of law can do is to order for the conduct of a fresh election.

The Supreme Court judgement looks manifestly immoral and untied to democracy.

Therefore, if there is any opportunity for the court to review it, it should be able to look at it again.

“If you look at the issue from another angle, it is well worth reviewing because there was no legal basis to award a victory to a party that has not won the election but, of course, we don’t know what the court would say when it is approached to look at it again.”

Also, a former President of the NBA, Austin Alegeh (SAN), said such applications are welcomed in law practice, adding “anybody can file anything, but whether the court will grant it is a different matter altogether.”

“There are well laid out conditions for such unusual applications, whether they exist in this particular case is for them to convince the court,” he added.

Newsflash Nigeria is an online newspaper that is developed and written exclusively for Nigerians. It’s packed with up-to-the-minute Local and National Economy News, Share & Capital Market, Health, Sports, Education, Technology, Business and Opinions.

To make further advert enquiries or place an order, please contact us at [email protected] and +2348053316946 and WhatsApp number 08033546732