The Enugu Division of the Court of Appeal has ruled that the election petition tribunal in Awka acted properly in striking out the case filed by Professor Dora Akunyili and the All Peoples Grand Alliance (APGA) contesting the victory of Dr. Chris Ngige in the April 2011 senatorial election.
The Enugu Division of the Court of Appeal has ruled that the election petition tribunal in Awka acted properly in striking out the case filed by Professor Dora Akunyili and the All Peoples Grand Alliance (APGA) contesting the victory of Dr. Chris Ngige in the April 2011 senatorial election.
Last week, the appellate court had surprised some legal experts by agreeing to hear an appeal in which Professor Akunyili and APGA argued that a key provision of the electoral law requiring the disposition of all election cases within 180 days did not pertain to their case. Earlier, the election tribunal had dismissed Mrs. Akunyili’s petition on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal invoked recent unambiguous rulings by the Nigerian Supreme Court to the effect that the 180-day provision could not be toyed with.
In its ruling delivered today, the appeal court finally upheld the tribunal’s decision. The appellate panel stated that the appeal gravely misapprehended the finality of the Supreme Court decisions and the doctrine of “stare decisis,” and added that “once the Supreme Court gives a verdict, every decision of the subordinate courts give way.”
The appeal court’s unanimous decision upheld the election tribunal’s judgment of February 21. The court ruled that “no order can bring to life a petition which is dead.”
Mrs. Akunyili was not present in court to hear the judgment which brings to a close her battle to unseat Senator Ngige. However, her husband, Chike Akunyili, a medical doctor, was in court.
SaharaReporters sent a text message to Professor Akunyili asking for her comments on today’s verdict. She texted a response indicating her plan to issue a formal statement.
In a statement sent to us shortly after, she said Dr. Ngige “did everything humanly possible to ensure that my petition would not be heard,” adding that her opponent’s “legal team employed delay tactics, using one crafty argument after another to frustrate the hearing of my case.”
She further stated that she and her witnesses had just concluded their submissions “when the Supreme Court ruling on 180 days came to [Dr. Ngige’s] rescue.”
Mrs. Akunyili suggested that “Dr. Ngige must be relieved because he is aware that he did not win the election,” then queried: “If he won the election, why was he desperate to ensure that my petition should not be heard?”
The APGA candidate described today’s ruling as “a sad day for justice in our country because technicality has triumphed over merit.”
In response, a spokesman for Senator Ngige described Akunyili’s statement as “her typical exercise in duplicity and deception,” adding that “she knows full well that her petition was bogus on all counts.” Asked if it was fair to win their case on technical grounds, the source stated that the lawyers for INEC and Senator Ngige had thrashed the APGA candidate’s claims in court.
“Anybody who is in doubt that the woman’s claims are false should just watch the video of our lawyer examining Professor Akunyili in court. When she was put in the witness box and confronted with facts and figures, she was forced to admit the truth, which is that her claims were baseless – and that she was actually the beneficiary of inflated votes.
”