Anambra Central Tussle: Okonkwo, INEC, Others Know Fate Tomorrow

Police deploy 4,300 officers for rerun election

Alex Enumah David-Chyddy Eleke

The Federal High Court in Abuja will on Friday rule on an application seeking to vary the judgment of the Federal High Court that recognised Obiora Okonkwo as the lawful candidate for the Anambra Central senatorial district.

Justice John Tsoho yesterday announced that he would deliver ruling on the matter after taking submissions of counsel for and against the motion brought by Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

When the matter came up yesterday, Awomolo informed the court of an application filed on December 21, 2017, requesting the court to vary its consent judgment delivered on December 13, 2017, wherein Okonkwo was declared the lawful candidate for the contested seat.

Justice Tsoho had in the judgment also directed INEC to immediately issue Okonkwo a certificate of Return.

But moving the motion yesterday, Awomolo who noted that counsel in the matter ought to have drawn the attention of the court to the three judgments of the Court of Appeal, said both the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and INEC were part of the processes.

He argued that since the Appeal Court in all the three judgment ordered a fresh election to be conducted within 90 days from the date of judgment, the lower court ought to defer to the upper court’s.

“So if it is brought to be notice of the court that there are judgments of the Appeal Court that said election should be conducted within 90 days, the court should defer to the judgment?” he asked.

Awomolo in his submission then urged the court to set aside its decision and not discountenance the decision of a superior court.

He submitted that where a consent judgment is entered in error, it is bound to be set aside, adding that the court of law cannot compel illegality or impossibility.

However, counsel to the judgment creditor and 1st respondent, Sebastine Hon (SAN), urged the court to dismiss the application for lacking in merit and being vague.

He claimed that the applicant’s submission contradicts the key prayer of the application which he said is also vague.

Hon also added that the absence of the seal of the deponent on the affidavit in support of the motion, rendered it incompetent.

Responding to the issue of court hierachy raised by INEC, Hon argued that the lower court cannot defer to the upper court since the rule changes when it involves a pre-election matter.

He said the decision of the court was not unlawful in the face of the Appeal Court as the Federal High Court in a judgment delivered by Justice Ahmed Mohammed in the same dismissed the court of Appeal processes as unrelated to the pre-election matter.

Hon added that INEC was yet to appeal the decision.

He also drew the court attention to a notice of appeal filed at the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Court of Appeal by the PDP as well as an application for stay, adding that based on the appeal the judgment of the upper court cannot be binding.

Hon in urging the court to dismiss the motion for lacking in merit, however, the said if the court is inclined to grant the application to vary its judgment, it should however

Cont’donPg48