Ihedioha posited that Hope Uzodinma, incumbent governor of Imo, fraudulently misled the court to pronounce him as winner of the election, adding that the judgment should be nullified.
Emeka Ihedioha, ousted governor of Imo State, has filed for review of the judgment of the Supreme Court that kicked him out of office.
Ihedioha posited that Hope Uzodinma, incumbent governor of Imo, fraudulently misled the court to pronounce him as winner of the election, adding that the judgment should be nullified.
Ihedioha, who is seeking “an order setting aside as a nullity the judgment delivered by the court”, founded his application on the ground that the Court of Appeal had earlier dismissed the petition of Uzodinma as incompetent and struck it out.
He added that while the Supreme Court did not consider the appeal of Uzodinma on this point, the judgment of the Court of Appeal dismissing the petition still stands, adding that there was no basis for the apex court to pronounce the appeal and declare Uzodinma as the winner. [story_link align="left"]77420[/story_link]
In his application, Ihedioha also noted that, “The judgment was delivered without jurisdiction in that by virtue of S.140(2) of the Electoral Act, once the court says that the election was invalid, the only possible judgment the court is allowed to give is a nullification of the election, and not to declare Hope Uzodinma winner.
“That there was no proof before the court nor did the Supreme Court state how it arrived at the declaration that Hope Uzodinma met the constitutionally required geographical spread. "To meet this requirement, the Supreme Court ought to state the scores and percentages of all the 70 candidates that contested the election, local government by local government.
"This was not done by the Supreme Court and therefore had no basis and jurisdiction to declare Hope Uzodinma winner of the election.
“That the judgment was a nullity having been obtained by fraud or deceit in that Hope Uzodinma fraudulently misled the Supreme Court into holding that a total of 213,495 were unlawfully excluded from his votes.
"The fraud was further orchestrated by the fact that the total votes cast was more than the number of voters accredited to vote. The fraud was further demonstrated by the document tendered by INEC (FORM EC40G) which clearly showed that there were no valid elections in the disputed 388 polling units.
“That the judgment was a nullity because it was given per incuriam, which means that the Supreme Court did not take its attention to some existing laws and facts even on the face of the proceedings.”
Ihedioha also posited that with the declaration of the court, the number of votes have exceeded the number of accredited voters.
He noted that the present application was not subject to the 60 days limitation period in section 285(7) of the constitution “because an application to set aside a null judgment or order is not circumscribed by statutes of limitation, and section 285 (7) of the constitution is, to all intents and purposes, a statute of limitation.”
He urged the apex court to nullify its previous judgment and clean itself of corruption by acting in line with the law by pronouncing him winner of the election.
Ihedioha said, “Justices of this court are human beings capable of erring.
“This court has the power to overrule itself (and has done so in the past) for it gladly accepts that it is far better to admit an error than to preserve an error.
“At this, of all times, our Supreme Court has been afforded this unique opportunity of allaying the fears of those who cast aspersions on the credibility of our courts.
“Your verdict on this matter should match the solemn oath you have taken. Remember that every decision of the Supreme Court involves the good name of the judiciary.
“Prove to the world that the Supreme Court is sacred. Let your verdict help to retain the good graces of our people.”
Uzodinma, who was declared governor of Imo on January 14 by the Supreme Court, said that he would no longer condone protests calling his emergence.
He said, “My government will do all within the ambits of the law to maintain peace and order; those who are engaging in these incessant protests must stop forthwith.
"I took an oath to maintain peace and protect the lives and property of the citizens, I will not fail to deal with any group causing a breach of the peace in the state.”