Kogi Guber: Wada Appeals Judgement Disqualifying Him As PDP Gov. Candidate

Justice D. U. Okorowo of the Federal High Court, delivering judgement on the suit filed by Femi Peter, a public interest litigator, in Lokoja on Wednesday, had disqualified Musa Wada from contesting in the 16th November 2019 Kogi State gubernatorial election.

Wada has through his counsel, J. S. Okutepa, SAN appealed against the decision on six grounds, to wit,

“GROUND ONE

1. The learned trial judge, Hon Justice D.U.Okorowo of the Federal High Court erred in law when heard and determined the claim of the 1^st Respondent herein when the court was completely devoid of jurisdiction to entertain the case and in this grave error proceeded to hold that Appellant herein presented forged primary school certificate to the 3^rd Respondent in his form CF001 and this error has occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice.

“PARTICULARS OF ERROR

1. By section 285 (14) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, the claim of the 1^st Respondent herein falls within the definition of pre-election matters.
2. By section 285(9) of the Constitution supra, the 1^st Respondent herein had 14 days within which he must file his case before the Federal High Court from the date of the occurrence of the event, decision or action complained of in the suit.
3. The action complained of in the suit is the alleged false information given in form CF001 to the 3^rd Respondent on the 9^th of September 2019.
4. By Exhibit B to the Supporting affidavit and paragraph 10 of the said affidavit, the Form CF001 of the Appellant was submitted to the 3^rd Respondent herein on the 9^th of September 2019.
5. By paragraphs 8 and 9 of the said affidavit in support of the originating summons, the 1^stRespondent herein also admitted that he saw the publication of the said Form CF001 on 13^thof September 2019.
6. The originating summons in this case was filed on the 27^th day of September 2019.
7. From 9^th of September 2019, the date the Form CF001 of the Appellant was deposed and submitted to the 3^rd Respondent, being the date of occurrence of the event, decision or action complained of in the suit, is a period of 18 days outside of 14 days allowed by section 285(9) of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999 as amend
8. The action of the 1^st Respondent was statute barred.

“GROUND TWO

2. The learned trial judge Hon Justice D.U.Okorowo erred in law and acted without jurisdiction when he heard and determined the claim of the 1^st Respondent herein and in this grave error proceeded to grant all the reliefs claimed by the 1^st Respondent in the originating summons filed on 27^th day of September 2019 when:
3. By section 285(14) of the 1999 constitution as amended plaintiff/1^st Respondent herein has no cause of action.
4. By section 285(14) of the said constitution the plaintiff/1^st Respondent herein who is neither an aspirant nor a political party has no locus to file pre-election matter.
5. It is clear that by the coming into being of section 285 of the 1999 constitution as amended by the 4^th Alterations Act No:21 of 2017, section 31(5) of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended, cannot be resorted to by the plaintiff/1^st Respondent herein to ground a cause of action against the appellant.
6. The decision of the learned trial judge rendered without jurisdiction is null and void.

“GROUND THREE

3. The learned trial judge Hon Justice D.U.Okorowo erred in law when he heard and determined the claim of the plaintiff/1^stRespondent herein which was wrongly commenced by way of originating summons and in this grave error proceeded to grant all the reliefs claimed in the originating summons when:
4. The allegations in the originating summons together with the supporting affidavit and the further affidavit of the plaintiff and all the supporting Exhibits and the counter affidavit and further Counter affidavit of the 3^rdDefendant/Appellant and the other Counter affidavits in this case raised highly hostile and substantial dispute of facts that the claim of the plaintiff was not suitable to have been decided vide originating summons procedure.
5. The case was wrongly commenced vide originating summons in that the allegation of false information in form CF001 and presentation of forged primary school certificate leveled against the 3^rdDefendant/Appellant were grave criminal allegations which cannot be tried vide originating summons.
6. Judicial authorities such as First Guarantee Pension Limited vs Duru & Ors (2017) LPELR-42820(CA) at 38-39 Paras C-B, Benjamin K. Edeh & Ors vs. H. R. H. (Igwe) Anthony Ogbodo Okorie (2018) LPELR-43769(CA) at 30-32 para B, Bassey Etim vs. Peoples Democratic Party & Ors (2016) LPELR-40129(CA) at 25-26, paras B-D and Air Marshall Isaac M Alfa vs. Senator Aidoko Attai & Ors (2017) LPELR-42579(SC) at 27-30, paras. B-A, cited before the learned trial judge prohibits hearing this kind of claim vide originating summons.

“GROUND FOUR

4. The learned trial judge Hon Justice D.U Okorowo erred in law and arrived at a perverse decision when he held that allegations of giving false information in form CF001 and presentation of forged primary school to the 3^rd Respondent herein, made against Appellant herein were proved beyond reasonable doubt and in this grave error proceeded to grant all the reliefs sought by the plaintiff/1^st Respondent in his originating summons and this error has occasioned grave miscarriage of justice.

“PARTICULARS OF ERROR.

1. There were no allegations in the originating summons that plaintiff did not go to LSB/RCM SCH.OKURA-OLAFIA as evidenced by Exhibit C to the Supporting affidavit.
2. There was no evidence that the said Exhibit C was not issued by the Headmaster of the school the plaintiff attended.
3. There was no admissible evidence before the Court to prove the case as required by law.
4. The evidence in the further affidavit of the plaintiff/1^st Respondent herein was absolutely inadmissible evidence.

“GROUND FIVE

5. The learned trial judge Hon Justice D.U Okorowo erred in law and arrived at a perverse decision when he held that allegations of giving false information in form CF001 and presentation of forged primary school to the 3^rd Respondent herein, made against Appellant herein were proved beyond reasonable doubt and in this grave error proceeded to grant all the reliefs sought by the plaintiff/1^st Respondent in his originating summons when:
6. The reliefs sought by the plaintiff are declaratory in nature which cannot be granted on admission or weakness of the case of the defence.
7. The plaintiff did not establish his legal right to the reliefs.
8. All the Exhibits attached to the affidavit were to challenge the primary school certificate of the appellant were of doubtful origin that no weight can be attached to them.
9. The public officers who were purported to have certified them or wrote letters to say the certificate of the appellant was fake and not genuine did not keep custody of the certificate of the appellant
10. The documents relied upon by the learned trial judge were made while litigation was pending and by persons interested.

“GROUND SIX

6. The judgement is against the weight of evidence.

(More grounds of appeal may be filed upon receipt of the judgment from the trial Court).”

Wada is therefore seeking the following reliefs from the Court of Appeal:

1. An order allowing this appeal.
2. And order setting aside the judgment of the learned trial judge complained of in this appeal.
3. An order that the claim of the 1^st Respondent before the trial Court was statute barred that the trial Court had no jurisdiction to have heard and determined the claim.
4. An order that by section 285(14) of the 1999 constitution as amended, the plaintiff had no cause of action and lacked the locus standi to have filed the case before the trial Court.
5. An order dismissing the case of the plaintiff before the trial court.

Below are Wanda’s Counsel:

J.S. Okutepa, SAN
Prof J.O.Amupitan, SAN
Sylvia Enny Okopi, Esq.
Ede Uko, Esq.
Ojonimi S. Apeh, Esq.
Joy E. Adah, Esq.
Helen J.Apeh, Esq.
Onu S. Achem, Esq.
Godwin E. Awulu, Esq.
Dauda S. Abdulrahman Esq.
Onyinye F.JedidiahEsq.
Emodgyaje P. Galumje Esq.
Chisom L. Ikeudeoba, Esq.
Francis O. Udealor