Ogun PDP Crisis: Supreme Court Dismisses PDP, Adebutu’s Appeal

PDP Hails Supreme Court Ruling On Zamfara Election
A photo collage showing the Supreme Court and PDP logo.

 

The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal brought before it by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on the lingering legal battle on the nomination of its governorship candidate in Ogun State.

The apex court ordered that the suit instituted by Jimi Lawal, a governorship aspirant be remitted to the Federal High Court for a fresh trial.

Delivering Judgement, Justice Ibrahim Saulawa held that the Federal High Court was wrong in declining jurisdiction in the matter of Jimi Lawal.

READ ALSO: Any Party That Can’t Control Kano, Rivers, Lagos Is Out, Kwankwaso Slams Atiku

The apex Court agreed with the Court of Appeal in Abuja that the FHC had jurisdiction under section 285 of the 1999 constitution and section 84 [14) of the Electoral Act 2022 to hear the matter of Lawal on its merit.

The Supreme Court, therefore, ordered that the case be remitted to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for determination by another judge other than Justice Taiwo Taiwo who refused to entertain the suit.

Lawal who contested the May 25 governorship primary election of the PDP had challenged the emergence of Adebutu, alleging that an unlawful delegates list was used by the main opposition party to conduct its election.

Among others, Lawal had prayed that the purported primary election of May 25 be cancelled and another be conducted with the authentic Adhoc delegates.

However, Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the FHC in his judgment delivered on July 29 declined to hear the suit of Jimi Lawal on merit on the grounds that the primary election was a domestic affair of any political party and dismissed the suit.

Not satisfied, Lawal approached the Court of Appeal in Abuja with a prayer that the decision of the FHC be voided and set aside on the ground of miscarriage of justice.

A three-man panel of justices of the Court of Appeal in their judgment delivered on September 30, agreed with Jimi Lawal, set aside the judgment of the FHC and ordered that the suit be heard on its merit.

The PDP, not satisfied with the Court of Appeal’s decision, approached the Supreme Court praying that the judgment of the Federal High Court be upheld to the effect that the conduct of the primary election is its domestic affair.

But Justice Saulawa disagreed with PDP, holding that by virtue of Section 285 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 84 of the electoral act 2022, the Federal High Court has the power to hear the case of Jimi Lawal.

The apex court proceeded with an order to the Chief Judge of the FHC to reassign the case to another judge for retrial on its merit.

Delta PDP Gubernatorial: Supreme Court  Fixes October 21 For Judgement

 

A file photo of the Supreme Court.

 

The Supreme Court has fixed October 21, for judgment in an appeal filed by the Delta State governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the 2023 governorship election, Mister David Edevbie.

By his appeal, Edevbie is asking the Supreme Court to re-affirm his candidacy.

In a 23- ground of Appeal, Edevbie, faulted the entire unanimous decision of the three-man panel of the Court of Appeal led by Justice Peter Ige and asked the apex court to hold that he is the rightful candidate of the PDP in the Delta State governorship election slated for February next year.

A five-man panel of the apex court led by Justice Amina Augie, approved the matter for judgement, after all the parties adopted their final briefs of arguments.

READ ALSO: IPOB Proscription: Appeal Court Shifts Kanu’s Joinder Application To March 7

While adopting his brief of argument, counsel for the Appellant, Edevbie, Mister Tayo Oyetibo, told the apex court that whereas Oborevwori had in an affidavit he deposed to, claimed that he was born in 1963, he, however, tendered a West African Examination Council (WAEC) certificate that was issued to someone that was born in 1979.

Besides, he argued that the case provided a unique opportunity for the Supreme Court to make a pronouncement on “the new legal regime introduced by section 29(5) of the Electoral Act, 2022.”

According to the Appellant, the section provided that any aspirant that participated in the primary of a political party and has reasonable ground to believe that any information given by his political party’s candidate, in relation to the constitutional requirement for qualification for the election was false, could approach the court to challenge the eligibility of the such candidate.

“Our position is that the 1st Respondent, haven supplied false information and submitted dubious certificates, he is legally precluded from participating in the election,” Oyetibo said.

“My lords will find conclusively from the evidence before this court, that he submitted false documents, in relation to section 177 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.”

Meanwhile, Counsel for Oborevwori, Mister. Damian Dodo urged the apex court to dismiss the appeal for want of merit.

He argued that the extant provision of the law is that the sort of allegations the Appellant levelled against him, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Dodo argued that there was no relief before the trial court for the said documents his client submitted to the PDP to be declared as false or forged.

He, therefore, urged the court to dismiss the appeal and reinstate the judgement of the Court of Appeal that recognised his client as the authentic candidate of the PDP for the governorship contest.

Similarly, PDP, through its lawyer also sought the dismissal of the appeal.

PDP argued that sections 177 and 182 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, made exhaustive provisions regarding the issue of qualification of candidates for an election.

“Submission of the forged document to a political party is not a constitutional ground for disqualification,” the PDP argued.

“The ground for disqualification is the submission of a false document to the Independent National Electoral Commission.

“The Appellant did not tarry or wait for the party to submit the name of the 1st Respondent, for his action to crystalize. His suit was premature.”

Though the INEC was cited as a Respondent in the matter, it was however not represented by any lawyer at the proceedings.

The Court of Appeal in Abuja had in its judgement on August 29, restored Oborevwori as the governorship candidate of the PDP in the state.

The appellate court, in a unanimous decision by a three-man panel of justices led by Justice Olabisi Ige, vacated the judgement of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which earlier directed INEC to recognise Edevbie as the bonafide candidate of the PDP for the election.

It held that the high court wrongly relied on Originating Summons Edevbie brought before it to disqualify Oborevwori on the premise that he tendered forged certificates to the PDP.

Delivering the lead judgement, Justice Ige noted that allegations Edevbie raised against Oborevwori “were deeply rooted and founded in criminality.”

He stressed that in view of contentious nature of the allegations, they ought to have been proved beyond reasonable doubt at the trial court.

According to the appellate court, trial Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the lower court erred when he granted all the reliefs Edevbie sought in his suit without recourse to evidence of witnesses that would have included institutions that awarded certificates to Oborevwori.

“Facts were irreconcilably in conflict and could not have been resolved without oral evidence”, the appellate court held, adding that the burden of proof in the matter was on the 1st Respondent, Edevbie.

The appellate court further maintained that Edevbie’s suit was premature as Oborevwori’s name had not been submitted to INEC by the PDP as at the time the legal action was instituted.

It held that preconditions stipulated in sections 177 and 182 (j) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, as well as section 29(5) of the Electoral Act, must be met before the right of any aggrieved aspirant to approach the court to challenge the validity of particulars submitted to INEC by any candidate, could crystallise.

It said the 1st Respondent did not in the entire spectrum of his suit, pinpoint how the PDP breached either the Electoral Act or the 1999 Constitution, as amended, in the governorship primary election it conducted on May 25.

More so, the court held that in the event that the case of the 1st Respondent succeeded, he would not be the beneficiary of the judgement as his political party, PDP, would have been disqualified.

Justice Taiwo of the High Court had on July 7, disqualified Oborevwori from contesting the 2023 governorship election in Delta State.

The trial court held that evidence before it confirmed that the defendant supplied false and forged documents to the PDP in aid of his qualification for the governorship election.

 

Wike Ratifies Assembly Resolution De-Recognising Omehia As Ex-Governor

file photo of Celestine Omehia

 

Henceforth, a Rivers politician, Celestine Omehia, will no longer be known and addressed as a former governor of the state.

This followed Governor Nyesom Wike’s ratification of the resolution by the State Assembly that Omehia, who was sacked by the Supreme Court in 2007, after about five months in office, be de-recognising.

“Yesterday, I received a resolution from the Assembly de-recognising Sir Celestine Omehia, who had enjoyed the privileges of a former governor of the State,” the governor said on Friday.

“But you will recollect that sometime in 2007/2008, my predecessor, His Excellency Chibuike Amaechi did not recognize Sir Celestine Omehia as a former governor of the State.

“When we came on board, there were issues and the Assembly felt that having served as governor, he should enjoy the status of a former governor.

“I’ve always respected the resolutions of the Assembly. I’ve never one day disagreed with anything the Assembly has sent to me.”

READ ALSO: Wike Bars Usage Of Public Schools For Political Rallies Without Approval

Governor Wike, at the signing ceremony in Government House, Port Harcourt on Friday, urged the public not to politicise the decision of the State Assembly in trying to correct an error.

“The facts are the Supreme Court judgment categorically stated that Sir Celestine Omehia was never a governor, because he never stood for any election and that it will be inappropriate for their (assembly) legacy that they didn’t respect the judgement of the Supreme Court,”  Wike added.

“In this part of our country, people will praise you when it suits them, but when you do the uncommon thing, people will not praise you.”

He said: “I had to call the Attorney General for him to give me his legal opinion as regards the resolution of the Assembly, and rightly the Attorney General said they (assembly) are right.

“That in the first instance, the recognition was extra-judicial, that the Assembly has no power to change the judgment of any court, not to talk about the Supreme Court.

“So, people should understand and not begin to play politics.”

Alleged N400m Fraud: Court Strikes Out Charge Against Olisa Metuh

In this file photo, a former PDP spokesman, Mr Olisa Metuh, was at the Federal High Court in Abuja on February 25, 2020. Channels TV/ Sodiq Adelakun.

 

Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday struck out the fresh charges against Olisa Metuh by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, over alleged N400 million money laundering.

Justice Nwite struck it out after considering the submissions of counsel for the defendants in the suit that a matter pending before the Supreme Court cannot be decided by the trial court.

At the day’s proceedings, counsel for EFCC, Olarewaju Adeola, told the court that the trial court had reached a decision on the matter which the defendant appealed and the Court of Appeal had set aside the judgement of the trial court, ordering a retrial by another trial judge.

He also stated that the matter is currently before the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the Appeal Court but the first defendant has an application for the release of his international passport before the trial court.

READ ALSO: Lagos Chief Judge Seeks Reconstruction Of Burnt Igbosere Court

Mister Metuh’s counsel, Afam Osigwe, also told the court that his client doesn’t have any application before the Federal High Court as Justice Nkeonye Maha had made a subsisting order which allows for the effective release of his client’s passport.

He averred that the matter is a gross abuse of court process as the EFCC cannot start the matter afresh while it is pending before the apex court.

He then urged the court to either strike out the suit or stay proceeding, pending the outcome of the appeal at the Supreme Court.

In his reply, the EFCC lawyer, who agreed to the submissions of the counsel for the defendants, said the prosecution will be more comfortable if the matter is adjourned indefinitely.

Justice Nwite after listening to the submissions of all the lawyers in the suit agreed with the fact that the EFCC cannot start a fresh suit while the appeal in the suit is pending before the supreme court.

The court, therefore, struck out the suit on grounds that it is a gross abuse of the court process.

Supreme Court Dismisses Suit To Compel PDP To Zone Presidency To South East

A file photo of the Supreme Court in Abuja.

 

The Supreme Court has struck out a suit instituted against the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), seeking to enforce the zoning and rotatory policy in the 2023 presidential election.

In a unanimous judgement delivered by Justice Adamu Jauro on Friday, the court struck out the suit on the ground of lack of jurisdiction to entertain it.

A presidential aspirant of PDP and former Deputy Speaker of Abia State House of Assembly, Cosmos Ndukwe, had instituted the suit against his party, praying for an order of the court to compel it to uphold the zoning and rotatory policy of the party.

Specifically, the presidential aspirant sought an order of the court to compel PDP to zone the nomination of its presidential candidate to the south-east geo-political zone of the country.

However, Justice Jauro dismissed the suit on the ground that the nomination of candidates for election was an internal affair of political parties.

US House Passes Bill To Protect Same-Sex Marriage

WASHINGTON, DC – JUNE 25: The U.S. Capitol is seen in the morning of June 25, 2022 in Washington, DC. (Photo by ALEX WONG / GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA / Getty Images via AFP)

 

 

The US House of Representatives passed a bill on Tuesday that would provide federal protection for same-sex marriage amid fears that the Supreme Court could roll back recognition of such unions.

The Respect for Marriage Act was approved in the Democratic-controlled chamber by a vote of 267 to 157, but its prospects are uncertain in the Senate.

Forty-seven Republican lawmakers joined Democrats in voting for the bill, which was met with scattered applause on the House floor when it passed.

Democrats have 50 seats in the 100-member Senate and 10 Republican votes would be needed to bring the measure to the floor.

The Respect for Marriage Act would force US states to recognize a valid marriage performed in another state, providing protection for not only same-sex unions but also interracial marriages.

The bill repeals the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act that defined a marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal benefits to married same-sex couples, in 2013 but the law had remained on the books.

“The bipartisan Respect for Marriage Act will enshrine and protect marriage equality and make sure legal, same-sex and interracial marriages are recognized,” said Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

The Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling enshrining nationwide abortion rights, on June 24, sparking forecasts that conservative justices could revisit other landmark decisions.

Same-sex marriage remains a high-value target for some Republicans and the religious right in the United States, although 71 percent of Americans in a Gallup poll in May said they support such relationships.

By bringing the Respect for Marriage Act to a vote in the House, Democrats forced Republicans to go on the record on the issue ahead of the November midterm elections.

Clarence Thomas, one of the most conservative justices on the court, in his concurring opinion overturning abortion rights, ignited fears that other progressive gains could also be in danger.

Thomas argued that the court should also examine its rulings on contraception and same-sex marriage.

Thomas — whose wife Ginni Thomas has pushed false claims that Donald Trump won the last election — was the only judge making such arguments out of the nine who sit on America’s highest court.

But the court’s shift to the right under Trump, who appointed three new conservative justices, has Democrats, activists and progressive groups fearing its future rulings.

The House plans to vote later this week on the Right to Contraception Act, which would protect access to contraceptives.

ICPC Detains Supreme Court Contractor Over Alleged Money Laundering

 

The Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), has detained the Managing Director of a construction company, Temitope Banjoko, over allegations of money laundering.

ICPC spokesperson, Mrs Azuka Ogugua, confirmed the arrest to Channels Television on Tuesday.

She said that Banjoko was awarded a contract worth N46,305,000 (N41,674,500 after tax deductions) for the demolition, and evacuation of debris of four houses at the Supreme Court judges’ residence in Maitama, Abuja, in 2017.

READ ALSO: ASUU Ready To Call Off Strike Once FG Signs Agreement – Prof Osodeke

The contract was not executed but the full sum was disbursed to Asbat Construction Limited, thereby attracting the attention of the ICPC.

Expressing regrets while writing his statement, the contractor claimed to have utilised the money for something else and some funds he was expecting were not forthcoming.

Banjoko was also said to have made a commitment to repay the money after the ICPC began its investigations.

The contractor had only repaid the sum of N5 million, out of the contract sum, leaving a net balance of over N36 million.

Investigations carried out by the ICPC, also revealed that some of the houses earmarked for demolition have been renovated and are now occupied by new judges.

The contractor, the ICPC spokesperson added, is expected to be charged to court very soon.

Money Laundering: Senator Nwaoboshi Vows To Challenge Appeal Court Judgement

Nwaoboshi Appeals Judgment Sacking Him As Delta North Senator-Elect
A file photo of Senator Peter Nwaoboshi

 

Senator Peter Nwaoboshi, the lawmaker representing Delta North Senatorial District in the National Assembly, has vowed to challenge his conviction for money laundering at the Supreme Court.

The Court of Appeal in Lagos on Friday convicted and sentenced Nwaoboshi to seven years imprisonment along with his two companies, Golden Touch Construction Project Ltd and Suiming Electrical Ltd, for laundering N322 million in 2014.

READ ALSO: Money Laundering: Appeal Court Jails Senator Nwaoboshi For Seven Years

The lawmaker is, however, confident that the supreme court “will subject the judgment to critical review”

“It is not unusual to have judgments that astound the parties, depending on where the pendulum swings,” the statement by the senator’s media team read in part.

“The judgment, the news of which is in the media, arose from an appeal by EFCC against the judgment of the Federal High Court, Lagos, which discharged and acquitted distinguished senator and co-defendants at the trial level.

“Steps are being taken to challenge the court of appeal judgment immediately and we are confident that the supreme court will subject the judgment to critical review accordingly.”

The Appeal Court in its ruling had also ordered that Senator Nwaoboshi’s two companies, Golden Touch Construction Project Ltd and Suiming Electrical Ltd, be wound up in line with the provisions of Section 22 of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act 2021.

This ruling followed the success of the appeal by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), challenging the judgment of Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court which on June 18, 2021, discharged and acquitted the defendants of a two-count charge of fraud and money laundering.

EFCC had arraigned the three defendants over the acquisition of a property named Guinea House, Marine Road, in Apapa, Lagos, for N805 million.

Senate To Probe Supreme Court Justices’ Allegations Despite CJN’s Resignation

A file photo of a courtroom at the Supreme Court complex in Abuja. Photo: Channels TV/ Sodiq Adelakun.

 

The Senate has resolved to continue with its investigation into the crisis in the Supreme Court despite the resignation of Justice Tanko Muhammad as the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN).

Lawmakers in the upper chamber of the National Assembly made the resolution during the plenary on Tuesday following a motion moved by the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele.

Justices of the Supreme Court had in a petition addressed to the immediate past CJN raised concerns over the deplorable welfare conditions and difficult working environment in the apex court.

Days after the development, Justice Muhammad resigned as the CJN on the grounds of ill-health, cutting short his tenure in office which was expected to last until 2023.

Barely a day after Muhammad’s resignation, President Muhammadu Buhari swore in Justice Olukayode Ariwoola as acting CJN, being the most senior justice of the apex court.

Addressing his colleagues during Tuesday’s plenary, Senator Bamidele who cited Orders 41 and 51 to move the motion drew the attention of the Senate to the assignment given to the committee at the last plenary, relating to the state of affairs of the Supreme Court.

The Senate, in its resolution, mandated the committee to go ahead with its assignment in the quest to find a long-lasting solution by interacting with relevant stakeholders to look into the complaints raised in the petition by the justices.

It also directed the committee to interface with relevant stakeholders in the three arms of government and other stakeholders and collate aggregate views and positions on the short-term, medium-term and long-term measures needed to decisively address the crisis facing the judiciary.

The lawmakers stated this to include the immediate fiscal interventions, as well as long-term and sustainable budgetary allocations required for the optimal performance of the judiciary in line with global best practices.

They also resolved to wish Justice Muhammad well after many years of meritorious service to the nation and to pray for his good health.

The Senate President, Ahmad Lawan, had last Tuesday directed the committee to get involved in the matter with a view to unravelling the root cause of the problem in the judiciary and how best the Senate could intervene to address the concerns raised by the justices.

‘History Will Be Kind To Justice Tanko’: Buhari Bestows GCON Title On Ex-CJN

FILE” President Muhammadu Buhari shakes hands with acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Ibrahim Tanko Mohammed, at the State House in Abuja on January 25, 2019.

 

In line with the usual custom, President Muhammadu Buhari on Monday bestowed the nation’s second highest national honour of the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger (GCON) on outgoing Chief Justice of Nigeria, Tanko Muhammed.

Muhammed resigned on Monday citing ill-health.

His resignation comes after a letter signed by 14 Supreme Court justices accused him of mishandling their welfare needs.

READ ALSO: Justice Olukayode Ariwoola Takes Oath Of Office As Acting CJN

Justice Olukayode Ariwoola has been sworn-in to replace him.

In a note on Monday, the President said history will be kind to the departing Justice.

“History will be kind to Justice Tanko Muhammed for his modest contributions to Nigeria’s Judiciary, the strengthening of our democracy and national development,” the President said.

Read the President’s full note below:

In line with the custom of decorating Chief Justices of Nigeria with the second highest national honour of the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger, (GCON), and upon the advice of the Council of State in that regard, as his Lordship CJN I. Tanko Muhammed is taking a bow from the Supreme Court, I hereby bestow on him the National Honour of the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger, (GCON).

Earlier today, I received a letter from the Honourable Justice Dr. I. Tanko Muhammed, CFR, resigning his position as Chief Justice of Nigeria and Chairman of the National Judicial Council, on health grounds. The resignation is to take immediate effect!

CJN Tanko was appointed to the Supreme Court in 2006, sworn in on the 8th of January 2007, and became the Chief Justice of Nigeria in acting capacity on 25th January 2019. He became the substantive Chief Justice of Nigeria and Chairman National Judicial Council on Wednesday, 24th July 2019.

Ordinarily, he was scheduled to retire from the Supreme Court on the last day of 2023. Unfortunately, as no man is infallible, ill-health has cut short Chief Justice Tanko’s leadership of the Nigerian Judiciary at this time.

I am therefore constrained to accept his retirement, albeit with mixed-feelings. Much as one may wish that the Chief Justice of Nigeria Muhammed Tanko is able to fully serve his term in office, it presupposes that he is able to perform the functions of the Office without let, hindrance or any form of disability.

The instant resignation of Justice Tanko is however envisaged under Section 231(4) of the 1999 Constitution as amended which contain provisions relating to vacancy and the occupant of the Office of Chief Justice of Nigeria being unable to perform the functions of the Office for any reason.

Under a constitutional democracy like ours, government powers and responsibilities are clearly allocated and shared among the three tiers; the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. The three organs must work harmoniously and optimally in accordance with their respective Constitutional mandates.

Nigeria’s Judiciary under the leadership of Chief Justice of Nigeria Tanko Muhammed judiciously exercised the Judicial powers of the Federation. His era witnessed several landmark, jurisprudential and policy decisions by the Supreme Court, and by extension other Courts established by the Constitution.

CJN Tanko dealt firmly with the issue of reckless and indiscriminate grant of ex-parte Orders that was assuming serious dimensions.

History will be kind to Justice Tanko Muhammed for his modest contributions to Nigeria’s Judiciary, the strengthening of our democracy and national development.

In line with the custom of decorating Chief Justices of Nigeria with the second highest national honour of the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger, (GCON), and upon the advice of the Council of State in that regard, as his Lordship CJN I. Tanko Muhammed is taking a bow from the Supreme Court, I hereby bestow on him the National Honour of the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger, (GCON).

This occasion is an opportune time for me, to, as always, assure the Nigerian Judiciary that this administration is committed to ensuring the independence of the Judiciary and will not do anything nor take any steps to undermine your independence. We shall uphold the Constitutional provisions on the Rule of Law and the principles of Separation of Powers.

In the circumstances, and as nature abhors a vacuum, I hereby invite Honourable Olukayode Ariwoola JSC, being the next most Senior Justice of the Supreme Court, to come forward to take the Judicial Oath as Chief Justice of Nigeria in an Acting Capacity, pursuant to Section 231(4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

I want to admonish the Justices of the Supreme Court to always remain faithful and bear true allegiance to the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and to remain steadfastly committed to the Oath of Allegiance which they all subscribed to, as contained in the 7th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

Our Nation is approaching a critical general election in 2023, the Judiciary must not do anything to fail the ordinary people of Nigeria which may make them lose confidence in the Judiciary.

Thank you and may God bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Bred In Iseyin, OAU Graduate: Meet The Acting CJN, Olukayode Ariwoola

A file photo of a justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Olukayode Ariwoola. [email protected]

 

President Muhammadu Buhari on Monday swore in Justice Olukayode Ariwoola as the acting Chief Justice of Nigeria.

His promotion comes after erstwhile Chief Justice, Tanko Mohammed resigned, citing ill-health.

Ariwoola was appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in 2011.

He was a Justice of the Court of Appeal between 2005 and 2011 after having been elevated from the State High Court of Oyo State. He was first appointed a Judge of Superior Court of record in Oyo State in 1992 from private legal practice.

READ ALSO: Justice Olukayode Ariwoola Takes Oath Of Office As Acting CJN

Ariwoola started his educational career in his home town Iseyin at the Local Authority Demonstration School, Oluwole in Iseyin Local government of Oyo State between 1959 and 1967. He was in the Muslim Modern School in the same town between 1968 and 1969 before proceeding to Ansar-Ud-Deen High School, Saki in Oyo North of Oyo State.

He studied law at the University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University), Ile Ife and bagged his bachelor of laws degree with honors in July 1980. In July 1981, Ariwoola was called to the Nigeria bar and got enrolled at the Supreme Court of Nigeria as a Solicitor and Advocate soon thereafter.

Ariwoola was a State Counsel on National Youth Service (NYSC) at the Ministry of Justice, Akure, Ondo State and later as Legal Officer in the Ministry of Justice of his home state Oyo State until 1988 when he voluntarily left the official bar of the State Civil Service for private practice.

He worked as Counsel in-Chambers of Chief Ladosu Ladapo, SAN between October, 1988 and July 1989 when he established Olukayode Ariwoola & Co – a firm of legal Practitioners and Consultants in Oyo town in August, 1989 from where he was appointed in November, 1992 as a Judge of Oyo State Judiciary.

Justice Ariwoola served as Chairman, Board of Directors, Phonex Motors Ltd – one of Oodua Investment conglomerate between 1988 and 1992. Chairman, Armed Robbery Tribunal, Oyo State between May 1993 and September, 1996 when he was posted out of the headquarters, Ibadan to Saki High Court. His Lordship served on the Election Tribunals in Zamfara and Enugu States in 1999. On Election Appeal Courts in Port-Harcourt, Enugu, Benin, Yola and Ilorin at various times.

Before his elevation to the Supreme Court, he served as Justice of Court of Appeal in Kaduna, Enugu and Lagos Divisions. He is also a fellow of International Dispute Resolution Institute (FIDRI) having been inducted in Dubai, U.A.E in 2014.

He has attended many International and National conferences and workshops in France, Atlanta Georgia, UK and Dubai, UAE.

Ariwoola is happily married with children and he loves reading, listening to good music, photography and shopping.

Electoral Act: Supreme Court Strikes Out Buhari’s Suit Challenging Section 84(12)

 

 

The Supreme Court on Friday struck out President Muhammadu Buhari and the Attorney General of the Federation’s suit challenging Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act.

The case was expunged on the grounds that it lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the suit and is an abuse of court process.

Earlier, a notice for the judgment delivery was served on President Buhari and the National Assembly on Thursday, inviting them to appear before the court today for the judgment.

The President and his Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, had filed a suit at the Supreme Court, seeking an interpretation of the controversial clause in the Electoral Amendment Act 2022.

In the suit filed on April 29, Buhari and Malami, who are the plaintiffs, listed the National Assembly as the sole defendant.


Senate, Reps To Appeal Court Order Removing Section 84 (12) From Electoral Act

Appeal Court Sets Aside Judgement On Section 84(12) Of Electoral Act


There have been several debates regarding Section 84(12) of the amended Electoral Act 2022 which was assented to in February.

Upon assenting to the act, President Buhari had asked the National Assembly to delete the contended clause, however, the parliament declined the president’s request.

Section 84 (12) of the legislation holds that, “no political appointee at any level shall be a voting delegate or be voted for at the convention or congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election.”

In their suit marked SC/CV/504/2022 and filed on April 29, 2022, President Buhari and Malami sought an order of the apex court to strike out the section of the Electoral Act, which they argue was inconsistent with the nation’s constitution.

According to the court document, the plaintiffs contend that the Section 84(12) of the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 2022 is inconsistent with the provisions of sections 42, 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 147, 151, 177, 182, 192 and 196 of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended), as well Article 2 of the African Charter on Human and People and Peoples Rights.

The plaintiffs further contended that the constitution already makes provisions for qualification and disqualification for the offices of the President and Vice President, Governor and Deputy Governor, Senate and House of Representatives, House of Assembly, Ministers, Commissioners and Special Advisers.

They urged the Supreme Court to make: “A declaration that the joint and or combined reading of the section 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 147, 151, 177, 182, 192 and 196 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended), the provision of Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act, 2022 which also ignores Section 84(3) of the same Act, is an additional qualifying and/or disqualifying factors for the National Assembly, House of Assembly, Gubernatorial and Presidential elections as enshrined in the said constitution, hence unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void”.

However, in its decision on Friday, the Supreme Court held that President Buhari having assented to the bill on February 25 2022, can not turn around to challenge same act .

In a unanimous judgement delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim the court said allowing the suit to have it’s way will amount to approbating and reprobating at the same time and no court of law shall allow that.

The Apex Court unanimously agreed that President Buhari lacked the jurisdiction to bring the suit before it because of the nature of the reliefs sought.