CAPTION:
Reserves judgment in five petitions
Bassey Inyang in Calabar¨
A new chairman has emerged for the Cross River State Election Petitions Tribunal.
He is Justice O A. Adeniyi who has been a member of the three-man panel of the tribunal.
Adeniyi replaced the former chairman of the tribunal, Justice Christopher Awubra, who stepped down from his former position to serve as a member of the panel.
The swapping of positions was necessitated by an administrative directive of the President of the Appeal Court.
The administrative directive followed an application filed by the lead counsel to Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidates, Paul Erokoro (SAN), challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to continue hearing on cases pending before it.
Erokoro had observed that the chairman of the tribunal, Justice Christopher Awubra, being a judge of the Customary Court of Appeal was not qualified to be the chairman of the tribunal.
Arguing his application, Erokoro filed his application urging the tribunal to disqualify itself from further hearing of any of the petitions because it lacked the jurisdiction to continue sitting because the constitution forbids a judge of Awubra’s status to head the panel.
“The issue of jurisdiction is a constitutional matter and must be determined before further steps are taken. There is need for the application to be determined.
“We object to the competence of the tribunal to hear all the matters at all. We object the hearing to be taken along with judgment and we would not yield to that at all,” Erokoro said.
Before Adeniyi assumed his new position, all the lead counsels to the parties in the matters were called to a conference in the judges’ chambers where they were informed of the administrative directive of the President of the Court of Appeal on the recomposition of the tribunal.
However when hearing resumed after the conference, Erokoro maintained his argument challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal and the competence of the erstwhile composition under the chairmanship of Justice Awubra.
Erokoro said the tribunal is only deemed to have been duly constituted now under the chairmanship of Adeniyi.
He, therefore, demanded that proceedings should commence afresh.
Erokoro who cited several authorities to buttress his argument, said every other proceedings under Awubra should be deemed null and void.
However, counsel to two of the Labour Party (LP), Professor Jacob Dada and Essien Andrew countered Erokoro’s application citing several reported cases to back up their position that hearing should continue without starting afresh.
In their separate arguments, the petitioners’ counsel argued that the three- man panel remained the same except that the change made was only administrative.
In their separate arguments, the petitioners’ counsel argued that the three- man panel remained the same except that the change made was only administrative.
They prayed that Erokoro’s application be rejected as it had been overtaken by the event, moreso as his application was incompetent in the first place.
The petitioners counsel also raised objections to the argument made by Erokoro, alleging that if the tribunal was allowed to continue, it might be biased towards him (Erokoro) and his clients (the respondents) because his application brought about the deposition of the former chairman and the reshuffling of the panel.
The petitioners counsel also raised objections to the argument made by Erokoro, alleging that if the tribunal was allowed to continue, it might be biased towards him (Erokoro) and his clients (the respondents) because his application brought about the deposition of the former chairman and the reshuffling of the panel.
After listening to all the arguments, Adeniyi in a short ruling, said the tribunal would attend to Erokoro’s application while delivering judgment in the pending petitions.
The tribunal, thereafter, proceeding to receive written addressed from the counsel in the petition.
The five cases listed for the day with similar application from Erokoro were all taken one after the other.
The tribunal then adopted the written addresses on the substantive matters before it.
After the adoption of the written addresses, all the matters were adjourned and judgment reserved for a date that would be communicated to the counsel in the petitions.
The five matters whose judgments were been reserved are petition number EPT/CR/NA/6/15 between Mr. Stanislous Tawo Afu of LP versus Christopher Agibe of PDP and others; EPT/CR/NA/2/15 between Senator Bassey Otu versus Gershom Bassey and three others; EPT/CR/NA/4/15 between Dr. Alex Egbona versus Bassey Ewa and others; EPT/CR/NA/7/15 between Dominic Edem versus Apostle Essien Ayi, and seven others; EPT/CR/NA/8/15 between Julius Okputu versus Hon. Dr. Rose Oko.
No comments:
Post a Comment