Katsina NASS Seats: Controversy Trails Supreme Court Verdict

Posted by admin Headlines, House, Katsina, Legislature, Senate, State News Monday, December 26th, 2011

Prominent lawyers yesterday expressed divergent views over the Supreme Court judgment of December 16, 2011 in which it declined jurisdiction to entertain an appeal on 10 National Assembly seats by Senator Yakubu Lado faction of the Katsina State chapter of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC).

The lawyers are Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), MallamYusuf Ali (SAN), Mr. Abubakar Malami (SAN) and Mr. Femi Falana.

Two factions of the CPC, Senator Lado and Hon Aminu Masari, are currently claiming that the Supreme Court’s verdict was in their favour and refuse to shift ground.
Those affected by the decision of the apex court include serving CPC lawmakers at the National Assembly: Senators Abdu Umar ‘Yandoma and Ahmad Sani Stores, and eight members of the House of Representatives: Murtala Isa of Sabuwa, Muntari Dandutse, Musa Salisu, Aminu Ashiru of Mani, Umar Adamu Katsayal, Muhammad Tukur, Tasi’u Doguro and Abdu Dankama .

The lawyers, who spoke during exclusive interviews with LEADERSHIP on the matter, argued that there was no controversy about the power of the political party to nominate candidates for an election.

Some of them however claimed that that judgment had compounded the matter .

Sagay said “I don’t have adequate information as to the actual position of the Supreme Court, but what I read was that the apex court upturned the elections of the 10 National Assembly members. But shortly after, the CPC denied the story saying the apex court did not say so.
If the 10 National Assembly members were not validly nominated as we have in Amaechi’s case, those who were validly nominated by the CPC should automatically be declared for the seats.

For Yusuf, “The Supreme Court judgment has compounded the matter the more. If the apex court has declined jurisdiction and also ruled out the courts below of jurisdiction for entertaining the matter in the first place, then all parties in the case should go back to the status quo.

“Although I have not read the judgment, but based on what I have gathered so far, the PDP can only go back to the court to enforce its right if it feels so strongly that its candidates ought to be declared for the ten seats.

Malami said, “As far as this issue is concerned, the PDP has no relevance in it all. The PDP had earlier gone to the Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Katsina State to contest the CPC victory in respect of the 10 National Assembly seats and obtained favourable judgment.

The CPC as a party appealed against the decision of the tribunal at the Court of Appeal and got the judgment quashed. Unfortunately for the PDP, the Court of Appeal is their final bus stop in that matter

“As the apex court has rightly pointed out it is the internal matter of the CPC and the party shall sort itself out on the issue. The PDP, in other words, cannot benefit from the CPC family quarrel”

Falana said, “the Supreme Court judgement is not confusing. It has simply stated and reaffirms its earlier position that it is the political party that nominate candidate for an election and not by order of the court. Invariably it is the political party that wins an election and not the other way round.

“The judgement did not suggest that the CPC has no candidate for the election. The apex count has only said that the court has no business in determining the party’s candidate and it has not said either that the CPC did not field candidates or win the election for the 10 seats in the National Assembly. In other words, PDP cannot lay claim to the 10 seats based on the said judgements of the apex court.”

-Leadershipwp_posts