Kogi Assembly: Playing hide-and-seek with court verdict

Date: 24-07-2012 10:40 am (12 years ago) | Author: Omogbolahan Babs
- at 24-07-2012 10:40 AM (12 years ago)
(m)

Wada and Jega
Kogi State is again in the news. Correspondent Mohammed Bashir reports that the House of Assembly is playing a hide-and-seek game with the Olamaboro State Assembly Constituency seat being contested by two candidates in  court.
Kogi State is famous for  being in the news for reasons bordering on political cum judicial crises. At least, in the last four years since 2008, there have been four major judicial and politically related issues in the state  that have made it the focus of attention.  
 
For example, as the 2011 election drew near, the state along with four others were exempted from conducting governorship election till 2012 by the Appeal Court on account of tenure interpretation. But the situation was reversed by the Supreme Court which ruled that their tenure had ended on May 29, 2011. 
That development, unfortunately, led to the making of history by the state as two governors emerged from the resultant interpretations of the apex court’s ruling. First was Captain Idris Ichalla Wada, winner of the December 3,  2011 gubernatorial election. The second person being the  Speaker of the Kogi State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Abdullahi Bello. 
But those who expected the circle of such judicial cum political crises to end with the inglorious emergence of the two governors were recently disappointed when the State House of Assembly found itself in another controversy over the seat of Olamaboro State Constituency. 
The tussle for the sole seat for the constituency is between between Hon. Damian Abdul Adejoh and Hon. Yunusa Olofu.
A Federal High Court sitting in Lokoja  nullified the election of Kogi State House of Assembly member, Honourable Damian Abdul Adejoh representing Olamaboro Constituency. It ruled that Hon. Yinusa  Olofu won the first  Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) primary and, therefore, should be sworn- in immediately. The trial Judge, Justice Nkwo Inang  held that the PDP primary election  held on February 4, 2012 was still valid and there should be no reason for another primary.
But not satisfied with the ruling, Hon. Damian Adejoh appealed the judgment.  The Federal High Court sitting in Lokoja, he claimed, erred in law in the judgment it delivered on June 29, 2012.
He claimed in the notice of appeal that “the trial court erred in law by assuming jurisdiction and deciding the case in favor of the 1st respondent’s when there is no iota of evidence on record that 1st respondent’s (Olofu) name was ever submitted by 2nd respondent (PDP) to the 3rd respondent (INEC)”.
Adejo, therefore, urged the Appeal Court to set aside the decision of the Federal High Court sitting in Lokoja in its entirety for lack of jurisdiction.     
The judgment in question is a general believed to be  in its first phase as there is ample room for appeal even up to the Supreme Court as it is a pre-election matter. 
 Undeterred by the notice of appeal, Olofu in company of many of his supporters marched to the State House of Assembly to be sworn-in. But he was turned back by the Sergeant-At-Arm of the House because he could not produce his Certificate of Return.    
The Chief Press Secretary of the State House Assembly, David Ehimohy told The Nation in a telephone chat that Olofu could not produce his Certificate of Return and that was why he could not be sworn. 
“Ordinary, if a court rules that you must be sworn in, you have to produce proof, such as the Certificate of Return, anything short of that, you can never be sworn in, it is a constitutional matter,” Ehimony explained.
But a day after Olofu was turned back by the Sergeant-at-Arm, strong pressure was allegedly mounted  on the Assembly by people said to be close to government in the state to go ahead with the swearing-in even without the Certificate of Return. 
It was learnt that the House of Assembly could not immediately agree to carry out the instruction that was allegedly passed to it. In fact, a marathon closed door meeting of the leadership of the House and other members took place that day. Another source confirmed that the meeting was at the instance of the Special Adviser to the State Governor on Assembly Matters, Mr. Reuben Idakoji, before they went ahead with swearing-in of Olofu. 
The development has since been described as an illegal way of unseating Adejo whose notice of appeal which was duly served the Assembly to stay action on the ruling might have been thrown in the dustbin.     
But the Chairman House Committee on Information, Hon. Akawu Salihu said the action of the House was in order.  He said the House contacted its legal advisers before the swearing-in was done. He also confirmed that it had to delay the action so as to get the legal opinion and implications on the matter. 
According to him, “we have to exhaust all legal means before we took such action. We contacted our legal department and they assured us that we can go ahead with the swearing-in since there was no injunction for a stay of execution.
“We did not act in isolation because already there was definite order from a court that Olofu be sworn-in immediately. We have to obey the court order to avoid judicial contempt,” he added.
But the leading counsel to Adejo,  Emmanuel Haruna faulted the claim, describing the action of the State Assembly as an embarrassment and bad precedence. He argued that his client had earlier filled a motion for appeal and dully served the Speaker. 
“I am shocked and embarrassed that the House could throw away its honor and decency and embark on such a shameful act. Have you ever heard anything such as this whereby a court gives  judgment in favor of a plaintiff and such person is sworn-in when the entire legal actions have not been exhausted especially as it has to do with a pre-election matter?,” he queried.    
He confirmed that his client did not just file a notice for appeal but also a motion for a stay of execution which was granted and that the Speaker of the House was duly served. He wondered why the House just find it difficult to respect such development?
“But I understand the power play that took place, especially, with an order from above the House had to bow to pressure. But that is not our business, the law of the land is supreme” he added. 
He also expressed disappointment at the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in the matter. “If INEC who issued
Certificate of Return to my client could now turn the other way round, then you must appreciate the fact that there is a serious problem in the Nigeria system. 
“What happened now is a replica of the pending case between the incumbent Governor and Alhaji Jibrin Isa Echocho. Does it mean that if the court rules against the governor, Echocho will just come and take over?”
He stressed that a pre-election case can drag on to as far as the apex court for determination before any action can be taken.
Expectedly, the swearing-in of Olofu has been generating a lot reaction and arguments. Some people believe that Olofu should show the world his Certificate of Return upon which he was sworn in. Others believe that he must have been issued with it as the House of Assembly would not do anything that can be regarded as a breach of the Electoral Act.
A socio-political group known as Kogi Integrity Youth Organization, in a press statement signed by the chairman, Ahmed Shaba, advised Olofu to present his Certificate of Return to the public to clear doubt and save the state from yet another round of controversy.
Shaba wondered why an elected officer will have the courage to appear for swearing-in without legal backing from the INEC. “It has always been the style in this country that a Certificate of Return is always relevant before any swearing-in could take place. But in the case of Kogi Assembly, a member got sworn-in without a Certificate of Return. 
“Ordinarily, in a case of this nature, since it is a pre-election matter and the defendant having lost the case at the Federal High Court, and subsequently appealed the judgment at the higher court, the winner at the lower court should have restrained himself from been ridiculed by the law, because I am very sure that he (Olofu) will leave that seat unceremoniously, that is, if he eventually escape arrest for contempt,” he added.      
However, some people believe that the Assembly might have relied on the provisions of the Electoral Act  2010, which states that “Where the commission refuses or neglects to issue a Certificate of Return, a certified true copy of the order of a court of competent jurisdiction shall, ipso facto, be sufficient for the purpose of swearing-in a candidate declared as winner by that court.”
But some legal experts faulted the Assembly’s argument, saying the same Electoral Act provides that “A sealed Certificate of Return  at an election in a prescribed form shall be issued within seven days to every candidate who has won an election under this act-provided that where the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court being the final appellate court in any election petition as the case may be, nullifies the Certificate of Return of any candidate, the commission shall, within 48 hours after the receipt of the order of such court, issue the successful candidate with a valid Certificate of Return.” 
The legal experts in their interpretation further averred that a High Court judgment can never be the final arbiter, especially, when its judgment has been appealed. They hold that no matter how definite a High Court judgment may look or sound, the loser has some period of days to appeal the judgment. 
Some people have urged Hon. Adejo to remain in the House and continue his legislative duties, pending the outcome of the case at the Appeal Court. 
A reliable source in the House told The Nation that the Speaker and some of the principal officers were armed twisted by the powers that be to swear in Olofu, disregarding the notice of appeal and the motion for the stay of execution.
The source alleged that  “To be sincere with you my brother, some of the honourable members tried their best to do the right thing, but these people at the top over powered them. They have to follow the line of politics and in the process dumped the legal path”. 
In the final analysis, the State House of Assembly might have inadvertently begun yet another round of controversy in a state known too well for such crises.  
 


Posted: at 24-07-2012 10:40 AM (12 years ago) | Gistmaniac
- Treasure2 at 24-07-2012 01:34 PM (12 years ago)
(f)
Na wa ooo
Posted: at 24-07-2012 01:34 PM (12 years ago) | Hero
Reply

Featured Discussions