The last might not have actually been found out about the contest for the Imo State governorship seat as Emeka Ihedioha go back to the Supreme Court today to look for a review of the judgment that eliminated him from workplace.
The court had on January 14, 2020 sacked Ihedioha of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on the ground that he did not score the legal bulk votes in the March 9, 2019 governorship election. In his location, the pinnacle court, after including the cancelled outcomes of the 388 ballot systems to the votes scored by Senator Hope Uzodinma of the All Progressives Congress (APC), bought that he be right away sworn in as the properly chosen guv.
In a unanimous judgment provided by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, the pinnacle court held that Ihedioha was not properly chosen which “his election was void and illegal.”
The court subsequently reserved the judgment of the Imo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal which of the Court of Appeal, both of which had actually declined to acknowledge the votes from the 388 ballot systems and to accept that the outcomes were unlawfully left out in the basic collation.
EJES ESSENCE NAIJA acquired a certified-true-copy of the record of the appeal submitted at the Supreme Court by Uzodinma and APC, issued by Nwana Ejike, Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Owerri, from an earlier record put together by Ibrahim Garba, Secretary of the Imo State Election Petition Tribunal, which reveals that there were mathematical and accurate disparities which the pinnacle court overlooked.
In the records tendered at the tribunal, Uzodinma, from pages 9 to 27 of his petition, drew a table of votes allotment which he declared were the figures gotten from the replicate copies of Forms EC8A handed over to his party representatives at the 388 ballot systems, the outcomes of which were left out in the general outcome of the election.
From the table he put together from the 388 ballot systems, there were 252,452 registered citizens, out of which 213,695 elected APC, and 1,903 elected Ihedioha.
But the table does not suggest either the overall variety of recognized citizens or the variety of void votes, if any, and the votes designated to the staying 68 prospects that objected to the election, aside from Uzodinma and Ihedioha.
Also, the replicate Forms EC8A tendered by the PW54, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Rabiu Hussein, revealed that there were no less than 6 ballot systems where more votes were taped above the registered variety of citizens.
For circumstances, on figure number 69 which reveals votes cast at Eziama/Okpala (Umualum Village Square, Eziama), the overall variety of registered citizens was 492, whereas the table reveals that the APC scored 819 votes and PDP scored 7 votes, implying that 334 more votes than the registered citizens were taped, apart from the votes surveyed by the other prospects at the election that were disappointed on the table.
Similarly, on page 22 of the petition referencing ballot system 282, the variety of registered citizens was put at 591, whereas the inventory reveals that APC surveyed 586 votes and PDP 9 votes, showing an overall of 4 votes greater than the registered variety of citizens. This, once again, left out the votes scored by the other prospects.
On the very same page 22 of the record, at the ballot system 285 (Obudi/Aro, Central Assembly Square, Unusable 11) with 449 registered citizens, APC was credited with 780 votes and PDP with 4 votes, leaving an overall of 335 votes greater than the real variety of registered citizens.
Figures gotten from page 79 of the record of appeal under product 384 reveal that APC scored 526 votes, while PDP was credited with 2 votes, and the overall votes cast was put at 526, showing 2 votes greater than the overall number registered citizens in the location.
But in its judgment, the Supreme Court stated that the votes from the contested 388 ballot systems were mistakenly left out from the votes of Uzodinma.
By depending on the inventory made by Uzodinma, the Supreme Court came to a figure of 950,952 votes, which is more than the 823,743 votes cast at the election, therefore verifying 127,209 excess votes.
Criticism has actually continued to route the Supreme Court judgment considering that it was provided, with demonstration rallies held in Imo and other states in the south east.
A union of civil society organisations the other day gotten in touch with the Supreme Court to see the judgment.
The group held that going through the briefs of argument amongst the parties, it was apparent that as residents, “the judgment read by the Supreme Court did not accord with common sense and did not seem to meet the ends of justice.”
The representative of the union of over 10 groups and Executive Director, Abuja Discussion Group, Dr. Manzo Abubakar, narrated a number of supposed abnormalities in the judgment and asked the pinnacle court to rescind itself even if it suggests conjuring up the ‘judicial doctrine of necessity.’
According to Abubakar, it is just by so doing that the Supreme Court can bring back justice, faith, peace and hope in the country’s democracy and gain back the self-confidence of the people in the judiciary.
“The confidence of Nigerians in the judiciary is at the lowest and we believe that the Supreme Court can help to restore it and save future elections. The judgment will go down in infamy and may make Nigeria a laughing stock in the comity of nations if not reviewed.”
He included that Section 176 (2b) of the constitution makes it clear that to be stated as guv, a prospect needs to not just score a bulk of overall votes cast however likewise 1/4 of the votes in 2/3 of the city governments of the state.
“It is axiomatic that nowhere in the petition or evidence did the petitioner, (Uzodinma) claim that he met the constitutional requirement of spread to be declared the winner”, the group stated.
The groups preserved that with the judgment of January 14, the pinnacle court had actually rejected the Imo people the chance to picked their leaders.
While sympathising with their lordships over their heavy work and brief time period within which to check out briefs and provide judgment, the coalition said such constraints would have led to the ‘faulty’ judgment.
“To err is human. It would be practically impossible for any human to have check out briefs and record of proceedings exceeding 5000 pages in the matter within two hours after hearing, when he also had pressure of time to deliver judgment in the remaining pending governorship appeals. No doubt, this accounted for the mistakes made by the apex court.
“The Supreme Court is supreme and can creatively reinvent its rules to do justice. It is necessary to do so now more than ever to save the Nigerian democracy, constitutionalism and retrieve the judicial and justice system from its present opprobrium,” the groups stated.