The Supreme Court has declined jurisdiction to review its judgment delivered on January 29 in the leadership dispute within the Anambra State chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
The apex court noted that by its rules and the provisions of the constitution, it lacked jurisdiction to review its own judgment.
Ruling on an application filed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) seeking clarifications and consequences of the judgment, Justice John Okoro held that the judgment by its ordinary meaning did not need to be subjected to any clarification.
In the unanimous ruling endorsed by the 5-man panel of the court, Justice Okoro said that the dispute on whether the Certificate of Return should be withdrawn from the serving lawmakers and giving to the list of candidates of the Oguebego faction was not an issue before the court and that the court never made any pronouncement to that effect.
Rewriting The Judgment
The court held that Order 8, Rule 16 of the Supreme Court expressly stated that the court shall not review its judgment once giving, except there was a clerical mistake or slip which in this case, never happened.
It also held that what was brought before it was the issue of leadership of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Anambra State and not on the implication of elections that was conducted thereafter.
The court noted that the action sought would amount to rewriting the judgment and giving order where nothing had been shown that there was a clerical mistake in the judgment.
Reacting to the ruling, counsel to INEC, Adebgoyega Awomolo, said that the decision of the court had resolved to blackmail and confusion employed by parties in the suit to suit their own purposes, a position supported by the counsel to PDP, Emeka Etiaba.
However counsel to the Ejike Oguebego faction, Chris Uche, said that the ruling had cleared the way for his clients to benefit from the judgment delivered on January 29, 2016.