Nduka Nwosu reports that the Supreme Court will on July 13 decide the appeal by the faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance led by Chief Martin Agbaso seeking the nullification of the Appeal Court verdict, which reinstated Dr. Victor Oye as national chairman of the party.
As July 13 draws closer, the two factions of the All Progressives Grand Alliance, APGA, will be at the apex court Abuja to know the next move to make in the fight to determine the authentic national chairman of the party. This is as reports by newspapers last week suggest the outcome of the judgment has already been known by the Victor Oye faction of the party with wild jubilations in Anambra and Imo states.
Regardless of what this portends for the judiciary which has been working relentlessly to redeem its forlorn image and perception after a bloodied encounter with the EFCC, there is a popular opinion that the present dispensation of the Supreme Court under the headship of the Chief Justice of the Federation Walter Onoghen, that such tales reminiscent of the experiences of yesteryears in this Fourth Republic have become history.
Onoghen has been speaking at different fora on his game plan to turn around the image of the judiciary as corruption free and prepared to deliver what is required of it in a three tier government. At one of such fora, at the National Judicial Council conference in Abuja the
CJN spoke on the topic, ‘Enhancing the Quality of Judicial Services,’ insisting that the prestige of the judiciary must be preserved in a three tier system of government. The behaviour of judges, the Chief Justice affirmed, “is closely scrutinised to guarantee continued confidence in the integrity of the courts.†This is an assurance that has rekindled interest on judicial pronouncements in this dispensation.
Therefore there is hope that come July 13, the two parties involved would have a cause for cheer since both have dismissed the impression that such a pronouncement was already before the public knowledge.
Although the two principal actors Chiefs Martin Agbaso and Victor Oye are carefully avoiding the press for fear of being aligned to subjudice, Chief Eneja Okeke, an APGA chieftain was optimistic the outcome would be fair to all concerned. Okeke was quoted as saying that though it could be true that the governor may have out of desperation influenced the judgment, the Supreme Court has given him cause to believe its integrity was intact and that it would not yield to the desperation of any interest in the case. “There may certainly be desperate moves to get judgment from the back door, but I can tell you that the integrity of the judges are at stake here.
“I am sure that they cannot sacrifice such hard earned integrity. So, any person can close the streets in jubilation for a case which judgment is still several weeks away from now. That shows their desperation, but we are not bothered because the truth must prevail,†Okeke said.
Why did the Martin Agbaso faction go to court after the Enugu Court of Appeal quashed the judgment from the lower court delivered by Justice A. R. Ozoemena? According to reports, Chief Martin Agbaso had approached the Supreme Court, seeking nullification of the Appeal
Court verdict, which reinstated Dr. Victor Oye as the authentic national chairman of the party. Agbaso’s appeal filed on August 16, 2017 is seeking for, among other things, “a stay of execution of the Appeal Court verdict sitting in Enugu on the matter pending the
determination of the case by the apex court.
“The special Appeal Court panel of three judges’ led by Justice Abdul Aboki in their Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2017 judgement at Enugu dismissed the order of the lower court for want of jurisdiction. The special panel comprised Justice Abdul Aboki, (Presiding), Justice Bolaji Yesuf and Justice Ibrahim Shatta Bodlya.â€
The High Court’s ruling followed an application brought to it by the party’s Deputy Chairman in Enugu State, Mike Alioke, asking the Court for an order of mandamus, compelling INEC to recognise the decision of APGA appointing Agbaso as the acting national chairman of the party.
Alioke had also prayed the court for a declaration that by section 4 of the Police Act, both the Inspector General of Police and the Enugu State Commissioner of Police are bound to ensure the compliance of the decision of APGA regarding the appointment of Agbaso as the acting
national chairman of the party in order to forestall a breakdown of law and order.
He had also prayed for an order prohibiting INEC and its privies from recognizing or accepting any other person as the national chairman of APGA other than Chief Agbaso as submitted to it by the party.
Dissatisfied with the judgement, Victor Oye had challenged the order of Justice A. R. Ozoemena of the Enugu State High Court at an Appellate court and the Appeal Court granted him his request, which was later challenged at the Supreme Court by the other party.
The Supreme Court had reserved judgement on the matter for July 13, following the refusal of the presiding judge, Justice Rhode Vivour, to discontinue with the case as requested by counsels to the defendant, Victor Oye.
The APGA faction that went to the Supreme Court stated that the issues for determination submitted in its Appeal as distilled from the Grounds of Appeal are as follows:
“Whether the learned justices of the Court of Appeal were right when they refused to stay proceedings in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 notwithstanding their acknowledgment of the fact of the pendency of Appeal Nos. SC/598/2017 and SC/600/2017 at the Supreme Court in respect of and pertaining to Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017? (Ground one)
“Whether the learned justices of the Court of Appeal were right when they assumed jurisdiction to entertain and determine Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 which was initiated by a party interested (id est, 1st Respondent therein) without the prior leave of the Court first sought and obtained? (Ground two)
“Whether the learned justices of the Court of Appeal were right when they held that the Motion on Notice and the order of the Court of Appeal of 10th July, 2017 in Appeal No. CA/E/358/2017, seeking to regularize the Notice of Appeal filed in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 filed without the prior leave of court by a party interested, effectively cured the defect in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017? (Ground three)
In the concluding argument Agbaso’s lawyers led by Tochukwu Maduka submitted that “it was wrong for the Court below to expect an application for stay of proceedings to be filed before it or that original copies of the Application for stay of proceedings filed at the Supreme Court to be placed before it (even though the original copies of the said processes were before the court below) to enable it stay proceedings. By the said Order 8 Rule 10 of the Supreme Court Rules, the court below was no longer seized of the proceedings in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 following the entering of the Record of Appeal in respect of the said Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 at the Supreme Court as appeal No. SC/600/2017.
“We further submit, with respect, that the refusal of the court below to stay proceedings in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 following the pendency of Appeal No. SC/600/2017 at the Supreme Court appears to be a disrespect to the authority of the Supreme Court and a disregard to the principle of stare decisis and the hierarchy of courts as established by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“In the final analysis and from the postulations and submissions contained in this Appellant’s Brief of Argument, we most humbly but firmly pray your Lordships to allow this Appeal and to set aside the Ruling and judgment of the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 delivered on the 15th and 16th days of August, 2017 on the following grounds, to wit:
“The learned justices of the Court of Appeal were wrong when they refused to stay proceedings in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 notwithstanding their acknowledgment of the fact of the pendency of Appeal Nos. SC/598/2017 and SC/600/2017 at the Supreme Court in respect of and pertaining to Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017.
“The learned justices of the Court of Appeal were wrong when they assumed jurisdiction to entertain and determine Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 which was initiated by a party interested (id est, 1st Respondent therein) without the prior leave of the Court first sought
and obtained.
“The learned justices of the Court of Appeal were wrong when they held that the Motion on Notice and the order of the Court of Appeal of 10th July, 2017 in Appeal No. CA/E/358/2017, seeking to regularize the Notice of Appeal filed in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017 filed without the prior leave of court by a party interested, effectively cured the defect in Appeal No. CA/E/367/2017.
When this last lap of endless litigations is overcome, APGA the party on which Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu contested as Presidential candidate needs to re-focus and expand its frontier from a regional to a national party. At a point in its history, APGA like the AD, the ACN, the NPC, the UPN and the Action Group, was at the verge of dominating the politics of the South East when the PDP led government tactically decimated it through its widespread rigging of the elections of 2003.
The APGA legacy remains the driving force of the founding fathers, which makes it an all-inclusive party for those who are disenfranchised, those who are locked out of opportunity, those who have challenges dealing with the vagaries of day to day living, the unhappy members of the polity getting minimum or no benefit from good governance, a party that seeks to create opportunity for those who are not equitably treated, those Nigerians who are yearning for good government and infrastructure development such as public healthcare, good roads, electricity, affordable education, access to jobs et al, those in search of the legacy of truth, honor, justice and the like.
The big question is, does APGA in its current format, represent any of these postulations?
A regionally based party, which is what APGA currently is, cannot be taken seriously. APGA is a party that has remained in Anambra State with little hope of regaining its rising status as the dominant party of the South-east
