Wike Rejects Tribunal’s Ruling on Inspection of Materials

The  tribunal, had last month granted an ex-parte application by APC governorship candidate, Dakuku Peterside compeling the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) allow the inspection of materials used for the election.

Following INEC’s alleged refusal to obey the order on the ground that Wike had applied to set aside the order. On its part, PDP challenged the court’s jurisdiction.

Inn his ruling, Thursday, tribunal  chairman, Justice Muazu Pindiga refused Wike’s application on the ground that it lacked merit.

He, however,  ruled that all parties be present during the inspection .

Reacting to the ruling, counsel to the governor, Godwin Obla, SAN promised to challenge the tribunal’s ruling.‎ He insisted that the court lacked the jurisdiction to deliver such ruling and, therefore, would not stand.

Justice Pindiga enoted that the order made on June 11 was in accordance with the provision of Section 151 of the Electoral Act and was directed at INEC and not Wike.

“There is need for us to clarify the order we made on June 11. The order was made against INEC to allow the petitioners access and inspect and obtain the certified true copies (CTC) of election materials in respect of the governorship election in the state.

“The order was made in accordance with the provision of Section 151 of the Electoral Act. The order still stands,” Justice Pindiga said.

He adjourned to July 22 for the commencement of the pre-hearing session in the petition by APC and Peterside against Wike’s election.

Parties had while arguing Wike’s petition on July 7, disagreed on why INEC was reluctant to allow the petitioners to inspect the election materials as per the tribunal’s order of June 11.

Petitioners’ lawyer, Akin Olujinmi, SAN had argued that INEC’s continued refusal to allow his clients’ agents inspect the election materials was a manifestation of an alliance between INEC, Wike and the PDP to frustrate the hearing of the petition.

Olujinmi urged the tribunal to dismiss the application by Wike on the ground that the order was not directed at him, but at INEC, which was directed to allow the inspection.

He stated that Wike’s decision to challenge an order that did not affect him and INEC’s refusal to obey the court’s order formed part of the plot by the PDP, Wike and INEC to frustrate the proceedings before the tribunal. He urged judges of the tribunal to be firm to halt the current disregard of its order.

“We have shown that INEC has not objected to the tribunal’s order and today, they have confessed before the tribunal that they disobeyed the order for inspection because the 2nd respondent (Wike) filed a motion seeking the setting aside of the order.

“Even the order for inspection was obtained and directed at INEC, but INEC has not formally complained to the tribunal in regard to that order. But they chose, on their own, to decide not to obey the order. This again, shows the shenanigan underlying this application to set aside the order for inspection.

“It is designed to legalize the conspiracy between the 1st and 2nd respondents (INEC and Wike) to frustrate the tribunal’s order. The law is that if the court is told that the order it made is being disparaged, dishonoured, disobeyed and disrespected, the court has a duty to take firm and decisive steps to ensure the order is obeyed,” Olujinmi said.

Stressing that the Wikes application was without merit, Olujinmi noted the contradiction in the reasons the applicant gave in seeking to set aside the order. He noted that while Wike, in one breath, argued that the order for the inspection poses threat to national security, he on the other, urged the tribunal to allow his agents participate in the inspection.

Olujinmi urged the tribunal to disregard Wike’s prayers on the ground that it acted within its powers under Section 151 of the Electoral Act, which empowers the tribunal to order INEC to allow any party to election petition to inspect materials used during the election being challenged.

He also faulted the argument by Wike’s lawyer, Emmanuel Ukala (SAN) that the order was made while the tribunal was yet to determine whether or not it possesses the jurisdiction to sit in Abuja. Olujinmi noted that while the order was granted on June 11, Wike’s application against the tribunal’s jurisdiction was filed on June 17.

Ukala had, while arguing his client’s application, stressed the need for the tribunal to set aside the order for inspection. He argued that it ought not to be granted ex-parte and that it was made by the tribunal without jurisdiction.

He contended that the tribunal could not be moved to exercise its powers under Section 151 of the Electoral Act through ex-parte application. He said such application must be made on notice so that the other party could be heard.

Ukala argued that it was within the tribunal’s powers to set aside the order it made in error and without according his client the right to fair hearing.  He said it was not current that his client raised the issue of jurisdiction after the order had been made.

He argued that his client had raised the issue of jurisdiction and challenged the competence of the petition in his reply to the petition filed before the tribunal on June4.

Lawyers to the PDP and INEC, I.A Adedipe (SAN) and Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) supported Wike’s lawyer’s position, with Ikpeazu insisting that INEC refrained from obeying the June11 order because of Wike’s pending applications. He said the commission was reluctant not to foist a state of helplessness on the tribunal.

End