Nigeria: Judiciary Still On Trial Over Amaechi

Abuja, filing a suit to stop INEC from substituting his name or disqualifying him from participating in the gubernatorial elections except in accordance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2006.

However, on February 2, 2007, PDP forwarded the name of Celestine Omehia to INEC in substitution for Amaechi’s, without any cogent or verifiable reason, an act which those who know better say is a gross violation of Section 34(2) of the Electoral Act and an action that was sub judice to Amaechi’s case in court. INEC effected the substitution in contravention of the country's laws. It might be instructive to mention that Omehia did not participate in the party’s gubernatorial primaries in the state. He was nominated by Ex-Governor Peter Odili, who he then worked for, as an Executive Assistant.

Ruling on the case filed by Amaechi in the Federal High Court, Justice Binta Murtala Nyako nullified the purported candidacy of Omehia by setting aside the substitution of Amaechi with Omehia by INEC. She described the substitution as reprimandable while the case was sub judice. This, lawyers say, removed the legal platform on which Omehia could stand to lay claim to be PDP candidate for the elections. Why then did INEC gave Omehia Certificate of Return as the elected PDP governorship candidate of Rivers State when a competent court had set aside his candidacy before the elections and up till this moment no other court in the country has upturned or set aside that judgement?

Rotimi Amaechi immediately went to the Court of Appeal in Abuja to declare him the substantive PDP gubernatorial candidate for Rivers State, following the High Court ruling that set aside Omehia’s purported candidacy. Omehia cross-appealed, praying the appellate court to set aside the judgement, that set aside his candidacy. While the people of Rivers State waited expectedly for the Appeal Court to declare Amaechi as the substantive candidate of PDP for the guber elections, the PDP issued a statement claiming that it has expelled Amaechi from the political party. That was another act of illegality.

The press statement expelling Amaechi from the party was issued during the pendency of the appeal and cross-appeals at the appellate court. This makes it subjudice, an illegal act that cannot stand in law. It would be recalled that this same illegality of subjudice was the main reason given by the Abuja High Court to set aside Omehia’s purported substitution as the PDP candidate. Yet again, the PDP went ahead to engaged in this same illegality!

But the Court of Appeal went ahead to struck out Amaechi’s substantive appeal to be declared as the substantive PDP candidate in Rivers State for the Guber polls, a few days to the elections. The court said it lack jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the appeal due to the purported expulsion of Amaechi from the PDP. Indeed, the Appellate court erred in taking such a decision. This fact was confirmed when Amaechi appealed to the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land.

The Supreme Court, in its ruling on May 11, remitted the case back to the Court of Appeal for hearing on the ground that the Appellate court was in error to have declined jurisdiction in the appeal. Consequently, presiding Justice Aloysius Katsina-Alu on behalf of the apex court ordered the Court of Appeal to determine expeditiously, the matter (appeal and cross-appeal) on its merit.

However, on Friday May 26, the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja, yet again, shocked many and Rivers people when it acceded to the request of Celestine Omehia to stay further proceedings on the matter, an action that was in gross disobedience and violation of the Supreme Court order. The ruling by presiding Justice Rabiu Danlamin Mohammed of the Appeal Court, to refer the matter back to the Supreme Court for clarification, was undoubtedly an attempt by the lower court to bring to shame and ridicule the authority and institution of the apex court. The ruling paved the way for Omehia’s swearing-in on May 29.

The Supreme Court was explicit and very clear when it ordered the Court of Appeal to hear the case on its merit and do so expeditiously. One does not need to read law or be a lawyer to understand that. For the Appellate Court to then stay proceedings and refer the case back to the Supreme Court for clarifications makes many ponder on what is really going on in the Appellate Court and poses a lot of questions.

Is there a plot to subvert or at least delay justice on this matter? Why the several avoidable delays in hearing the matter? Is it right for the Appeal Court Justices hearing the matter to allow Omehia’s legal team to continue to stall further proceedings on the matter? These are some of the many questions people are asking. Only recently, a group in Rivers State, the Rivers Success Movement (RSM) issued a statement where a lot of issues were raised and accusations made against the former Odili government of Rivers State in respect of Amaechi/Omehia court case.

Pundits say that there seems to be a ploy by Omehia to drag the matter in the Court and buy as much time as possible and the Court of Appeal Justices seem to be falling for this his antic. Omehia’s legal team seems to be doing everything possible to ensure that the court does not determine the substantive matter of whether the substitution of Amaechi with Omehia for the guber polls in Rivers State is constitutional and legal.

However, the Supreme Court has again come to the rescue. The apex court vide a correspondence from the Chief Justice of Nigeria, instructed and ordered the Appeal Court to hear the appeal on its merit, maintaining that its earlier verdict of May 11 was clear and unambiguous. But Omehia has again started his delay tactics. At the resumed hearing of the matter on June 7, Omehia’s legal team were not in court and a bailiff of the Court of Appeal accused Omehia and his legal team of evading service of processes from the court. The bailiff, one Yusuf gave a graphic illustration of how all his efforts to effect service of court processes on Omehia came to naught. To ensure that Omehia is served, in spite of his evasive antic, the Presiding Judge, Justice Rabiu Danlamin Mohammed ordered that Omehia should be served through the publication of the court processes in a national newspaper and fixed June 13 for hearing of the matter. The avoidance of service by Omehia has been a common occurrence in the pending matter, as the court has on two previous occasions ordered that he be served by way of substituted service through a national newspaper.

However, when the matter came up for hearing on June 13, Omehia’s lawyer stuck to his argument that the Supreme Court ruling has to go back to them for clarifications. The Appeal Court justices adjourned for ruling to a date that will be communicated to the parties by the court.
On Thursday, June 21, the appellate court presided over by Justice Rabiu Danlamin Mohammed yet again shocked many, when it ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter and yet again decline to hear the case, after it has been ordered twice, by the Supreme Court to hear the matter on its merit and do so expeditiously. The questions on everyone’s lips now are, if the appellate court lacked jurisdiction, would the Supreme Court order them to hear the matter? Is the Appeal Court now saying that the Supreme Court is wrong in ordering them to hear the matter? This latest ruling from the appellate court is a direct violation of the order of the apex court, a confrontation of the supremacy of the apex court that is capable of ridiculing the judiciary, and is seen by legal experts as a time buying tactic for Omehia. And this again raises the questions: what is really going on in the Court of Appeal? Is their really a plot to subvert or at least delay justice in the matter of Amaechi vs Omehia. Pundits say that the appellate court has shown clearly that it is not interested in hearing the matter, so, the Supreme Court should take over the case immediately. The Supreme Court as a matter of urgency should act now on the Amaechi vs Omehia case.

The twists and turns in the Amaechi versus Omehia case stinks. It is capable of bringing the judiciary to ridicule. Why did INEC presented to Omehia the Certificate of Return as the elected PDP candidate of Rivers State when a competent court had set aside Omehia’s candidacy before the elections and up till this moment no other court in the country has upturned or set aside that judgement? Does Celestine Omehia really have any legal or constitutional claim to the governorship of Rivers State? Why does it look like the Appeal Court justices hearing the case are falling for the delay antics of Omehia’s lawyer?

The people of Rivers State need to know who really is their new governor. And until the substantive case of whether the substitution of Amaechi with Omehia for the guber polls in Rivers State is constitutional and legal, and who truly is the legally elected PDP governor is determine by our courts, they would not know. Justice delayed, they say, is justice denied.

This is a simple, straightforward case. It is instructive to note that the Supreme Court had already set a precedent with a similar case with similar particulars. This is the landmark ruling it gave in the case between Senator Ifeanyi Ararume versus Charles Ugwuh, PDP and INEC. Ararume like Amaechi, had won the PDP gubernatorial primaries in Imo State and his name sent to INEC. But the PDP suddenly went to substitute his name with that of Charles Ugwuh without any cogent or verifiable reason, a gross violation of Section 34(2) of the Electoral Act. Ararume then went to court. The Supreme Court in its judgement on the matter, ruled that Ararume was the PDP candidate for the governorship elections in Imo State and order INEC to act accordingly.

For now, with Amaechiâ’s case having similar particulars with Ararume’s, the nation is watching how the judiciary would rule on his matter. Will it reverse itself or follow the precedent it had set?

ENDS

© Scoop Media