The Supreme Court has fixed December 14th for hearing in the suit filed by Umar Ardo against Governor Bindow and others.
In the court document it said, “IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA HOLDEN AT ABUJA. SC 153/2016: Dr Umar Ardo V. INEC & 5 Ors. Take Notice that the above APPEAL will be listed for hearing before the Supreme Court of Nigeria sitting at 9.00am on Wednesday the 14th day of December, 2016. Sent by Ibrahim Gold, Head of Litigation Department of the apex court to all counsels this afternoon.
By the above Hearing Notice, the Supreme Court has brought forward from February 6th, 2017 to next Wednesday, December 14th the hearing and adoption of Dr. Umar Ardo’s suit against INEC for conducting governorship election in Adamawa State in April, 2015.
This case is a very simple one. The basics of all the issues are easy to define and summarize. In the substantive case, Dr. Ardo is contending that by conducting election to the office of governor in April and swearing-in another person (Sen. Bindowo) as governor on May 29, 2015, INEC has reduced a 4-year second and final term of another governor (Nyako/Ngilari) of Adamawa State to 3 years 3 months, and that INEC has no such powers under the law. In response, INEC relied on section 182 (1)(A) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)for its action.
However, Ardo argues that section 182 (1)(A) came into being via an amendment of the constitution in January 2012. While the election and swearing-in of Nyako/Ngilari for the second term were held in February 2012, a mouth after the amendment, the relevant elements of section 182(1)(A) as they affect the governorship election in the state took place in 2008, four years before the amendment. This, in effect, means that INEC has given the amendment a retroactive effect. Ardo is contending that INEC has also no such powers to do so under the law. Indeed, the Supreme Court denied such retroactive application of this very amendment, in the case of MARWA v NYAKO and Ardo is relying on that particular denial.
It is on the basis of the foregoing argument that Ardo approached the Federal High Court in February 2014 seeking relevant relieves and declarations, but the court, under late Justice Chukwu, taking to preliminary objections from Respondents, refused to entertain the matter on the ground that Ardo had no locus standi to institute the suit having shown no special interest in the governorship matter in the state.
But as the Plaintiff, Ardo commenced that suit by way of Originating Summons, relying for his locus on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sen. Abraham Adesanya v President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1983. But in its judgment, the court completely ignored the reliance on that judgment and so failed to abide by its authority.
Hence Ardo appealed to the Court of Appeal contending that under the doctrine of satire decisis, the court of first instance and indeed the appellate court was/were bound to apply the decision of the Supreme Court. He prayed the appellate court to so declare and reverse the judgment appealed against and enter judgment on the substantive matter.
There too, the Court of Appeal, based on preliminary objection by the APC lawyer failed to entertain the issues at hand and instead delivered a judgment in which it struck out the suit on the ground that Ardo’s counsel failed to affix the professional NBA Seal on two of the processes (the Notice of Appeal and Brief of Argument). However, the appellate court entered its judgment without entertaining a motion on notice before the court praying to regularize the processes with sealed, filed and served Notice of Appeal and Brief of Argument in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court. This failure, Ardo contends, constitutes an infringement on his fundamental right of fair hearing as enshrined in the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Hence, his appeal to the Supreme Court.
What the appellant prays for in this case before the Justices of the Supreme Court is the reversal of the two judgments below and entering judgment on the substantive matter, granting all the relieves sought and making all the declarations prayed for and the necessary declaratory orders relevant to the justice of this case.
If the appeal succeeds, then the governorship election of April 11 last year will be annulled, the governor removed, the Speaker takes over as Acting Governor and fresh elections conducted within 90 days.
