Follow Us on Google
From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
For the second consecutive times, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has deferred its judgement on the suit by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), filed to declare the seat of Governor Ben Ayade of Cross River State and his Deputy, Ivara Esu, vacant, following their defection to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
Justice Taiwo Taiwo had originally fixed March 25 to deliver judgment in the case, but had to defer his judgment on the mater till April 6.
However, it was not to be, as the judgment was further put on hold following a letter by Mike Ozekhome SAN, counsel to the governor, drawing the attention of the court to a judgment of the Enugu division of the Court of Appeal delivered in respect of the defection of Governor Dave Umahi of Ebonyi state and his deputy, Dr. Kelechi Igwe, to the APC.
In the said judgment in reference, the appellate court held that governor Umahi and his deputy cannot be removed from office on account of their defection.
Therefore, rather than proceed with the delivery of the judgment, the judge ordered counsel in the suit to address him on the implications of the appellate court’s judgment on the present case. The development created a state of confusion and anxiety among supporters of both parties to the suit who had besieged the court for the judgment.
Ozekhome had prayed the court to bow and respect the decision of the Court of Appeal on defection related matter.
While addressing the court on the effects of the Court of Appeal judgment on the defection suit against governor Ayade, he asked Justice Taiwo to apply the higher court’s decision to dismiss the suit against his client.
Besides, he further drew the attention of the judge to a portion of the Court of Appeal judgment which held that under the amended Constitution, votes cast in any election belong to individuals and not political parties.
He further pointed out a portion to Justice Taiwo, where the Court of Appeal held that political parties are agents of individuals and just vehicles for individual contestants to canvas votes.
Ozekhome insisted that sections 180, 188 and 189 of the 1999 Constitution can only be invoked by the court to remove an elected governor only where such governor resigns, dies or is impeached by a State House of Assembly.
He added that the Supreme Court had, in recent decisions, made it clear that defection is immoral, improper, ugly and condemnable, but did not constitute an offence that can lead to the removal of elective public officeholders.
A similar position was canvassed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the APC.
Earlier, PDP Counsel, Emmanuel Ukala, SAN, had argued that the facts of the case which led to the Court of Appeal’s new judgment were fundamentally different from the suit of his client.
Ukala informed the high court that the Court of Appeal’s new decision was based on a suit by APC against APC, whereas the instant suit is PDP against APC.
He further submitted that PDP was not a party in the Court of Appeal decision, hence, the new judgment is not binding on it for the simple reason of lack of fairness.
Ukala urged the judge to hold that defection constitutes an offence as it amounts to the abdication of duties as a party with minority votes should not be allowed to rule over the party with majority votes.
After taking arguments for and against the new Court of Appeal decision, Justice Taiwo shifted judgment till April 7, to enable him consider the impacts of submissions by lawyers and the judicial authorities they cited.
