Breaking: Ondo PDP Tussle: Jegede Has Ground to Seek Leave of Appeal

The Special Panel set up by the President of Court of Appeal, Justice Zaria Bulkachuwa, to hear appeals arising from Ondo Peoples Democratic Party governorship primaries, Thursday gave leave to governorship candidate of the Ahmed Makarfi-led faction, to be joined as interested party, to appeal against the judgment of Justice Okon Abang of an Abuja Federal High Court of October 14, which ruled that Independent National Electoral Commission accept the candidacy of Ibrahim Jimoh of the Ali Modu Sheriff-led faction as the authentic PDP candidate.
The court, which accepted counsel to Jegede, Chief Wole Olanipekun’s argument, said the “appeal is grossly meritious and have no ground to deny the applicant the right to appeal” .
The court gave Jegede’s counsels a- 24 ultimatum to file appeal in the case
In a ruling on Thursday afternoon, the court said it found Jegede’s application appropriate because he was able to prove that he participated in the PDP Primaries and his name was already submitted before it was removed.
Olanipekun, counsel to Jegede had said earlier that there were two ingredients he wanted the court to consider.
“Does the decision leave to appeal – affect him (applicant), having participated in PDP primary? Second, the ground of appeal he wants to ventilate, is it crucial and fundamental issues?
According to him, “We brought the application before time. The ruling of the lower court is not binding on this court. What the lower court did was to preempt the appeal which was not within his jurisdiction.
“The exhibits attached to the affidavit show that the applicant is affected by the decision of the lower court.
“The judgment recognises that my client was an aspirant in the primary election.”
However, Nwofor said the motion was not competent. He said the relief to seek leave as interested party to appeal the October 14 ruling, was defective in nature.
“It does not identify the suit number, parties to that suit, which ruling was delivered. It is vague and incurable action. No amendment.
“Secondly, it is incompetent because the decision sought to appeal against is not properly before your lordship.
“Section 241 subsection 2 c has been interpreted by the Supreme Court in 1992.
“If the applicant wants to seek leave he must do so at the lower court under section 214. “He was never a party at the lower court. The decision he wants to appeal is a crime in nature, he admitted that the ruling he wants to appeal against is a committal of contempt of court by INEC. .
“Which interest has he got on comtempt on INEC. Does he wants to go to jail on behalf of INEC?
“The decision of October 14 is a post decision of June 29, which is an inherendetary judgment
And interlocutory decision is 14 days grace to appeal. The appeal is judgment of October 14 and it expired Oct 28.
“The applicant also needed prayer to seek extension of time, which is not before this the application was filed out of time without explanation .
It is incurable defective. The requirements to get relief are not met here as in order 7 rule 10, Appeal Court Rules.
“He (applicant) needed to show ground and reason why he must be joined as interested party.”
According to Nwofor, there was no deposition why the applicant should be joined.

Author: News Editor

7964 stories / Browse all stories

Related Stories »

Provide your email below, and we will notify you the latest news freely.


calendar »

November 2016
« Oct   Dec »