Kebbi: Why Supreme Court sacked kebbi state Gov Dakingari

Leave a Comment

The Supreme Court, yesterday, sacked Governor Usman Saidu Nasamu Dakingari of Kebbi State from office and ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to conduct fresh gubernatorial election in the state within 90 days.

The judgment delivered by a 5-man panel of justices led by Justice Walter Onnoghen, was sequel to an appeal lodged by the Congress for Progressive Change, CPC, and its candidate in the April 26, 2011, governorship election in the state, Malam Abubakar Abubakar.

In an unanimous judgment the apex court nullified an earlier verdict of the Sokoto Division of the Court of Appeal which ab-initio affirmed Dakingari as the winner of the April 26, 2011 polls.

While setting-aside the appellate court’s verdict on the premise that it was legally defective, the Supreme Court panel noted that the lower court erred in law when it deferred the reasons behind its judgment to a date outside the 60 days that was prescribed by section 285 (7) and (8) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, for the determination of governorship appeals.

It held that it was wrong for the appellate court to give its judgment within the constitutionally stipulated period for the determination of such cases and reserve reasons behind its decision till a date outside the period, saying such action ipso-facto rendered the said judgment nugatory.

The apex court observed that whereas the appellate court gave its judgment on December 29, 2011, it was unable to justify the verdict with reasons until January 24, 2012.

Consequently, the Supreme Court made an order setting-aside the decision of the appeal court, and upheld the verdict of the Kebbi State Election Petition Tribunal, which had earlier sacked the governor and ordered a fresh election in the state.

According to the apex court, the Court of Appeal not being the final court in the determination of appeals arising from the conduct of governorship elections, lacked the constitutional power to deliver judgment and defer the reasons for its decision, more so, to a date outside the mandatory 60 days prescribed by 4ection 285 (7) of the Constitution.

Justice Onnoghen who read the lead judgment yesterday, maintained that, “it is obligatory for the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court to dispose an appeal within 60 days from the date of the decision being appealed, since section 285 (7) implies that both the decision and the reasons for that decision, must be completed within the stipulated time. Any decision without a reason is no decision at all. The Judiciary has no option than to work within the time frame provided by the law.”

Meantime, the verdict has elicited mixed reactions in the polity. The PDP picked holes in the judgment saying it was capable of causing tension and instability in the country.

In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Professor Rufai Alkali, the party said it received the verdict with shock, adding that the party hierarchy was deeply touched ‘this temporary setback.’

We should commend the judiciary – Bamidele Aturu

Reacting to the ruling, Lagos-based lawyer, Mr Bamidele Aturu commended the Judiciary. ‘I think it is a good decision. Any decision that invalidates whatever that is wrongly done is always a good decision for me. Again, talking about our democracy, the Supreme Court is expected to intervene in a matter like this so that the politicians would know that they cannot go away with impunity. That will also send a clear message to the political parties and that the political elites should behave with decorum and in accordance with the rule of the game.’

PDP ‘ll win again – Babatope

A chieftain of the PDP, Chief Ebenezer Babatope, said the PDP had always respected the rule of law and would accept the judgment on Kebbi. ‘I also want to say in very clear language that we will win the election again and Governor Dakingari will return as governor with the full support of the people of Kebbi.’

It is good only if… – Pat Utomi

On his part, Professor Pat Utomi, said, ‘what Nigeria needs now is to establish the rule of law. Under the adjudication as we have it now, it re-inforces the rule of law. So, as long as the decision re-inforces the consciousness of people, it is good. What matters is that no man is stronger or weaker before the law. The course of the law is followed through and that justice is not only done but is seen to be done, then it is a good thing. But if it is percieved as not re-enforcing the rule of law, then it further deepens Nigeria’s crisis because there is a major crisis rocking our country. Unfortunately at this point, it includes the judicial process which the NBA president alluded to.’

It is a common occurence— Balarabe Musa

To Alhaji Balarabe Musa, the decision is a common occurrence and does not also mean the judiciary is clean. ‘I just see it as another opportunity for others to contest the election again. But you know what I am talking about, it is a common occurrence in Nigeria. It has a great implication for democracy, if democracy exists at all. What we have is civilian rule which happens to be a type of dictatorial military rule.’

Drop Your Facebook Comments Here!!


0 comments:

Post a Comment