SIR: The last might not have been heard on the legal controversies which have continued to trail the February 20, judgment of the Supreme Court which put in abeyance the challenge posed to Idris Wada’s candidacy by the winner of the ‘first’ PDP primaries held on January 9, 2011 in the state, Alhaji Jibrin Isa Echocho. New issues as to the legality of Wada’s continued stay in the Government House, Lokoja on the judgement of the apex court have again been brought to the fore.
Although Nigerians were bound by all judgments of the Supreme Court, the judgment by itself was not beyond criticism and or a review. The Supreme Court was in serious error when it held that the appellant in Jibrin Isah v INEC was not a party in Marwa v Nyako and as such could not derive any benefit from the judgement.
With much respect to their Lordships decision, the Supreme Court, by the decision in Marwa v Nyako invalidated the decisions of the two lower courts, set aside and nullified all rights or interest that may have accrued from the decisions and of course restored whatever and whichever interest that was suspended or put in abeyance during the subsistence of the decisions of the lower courts.
Against the foregoing background, we submit that it was the decisions of the Federal High Court and Court of Appeal (that were set aside by the Supreme Court in Marwa v Nyako) that stalled and hindered Appellant’s already restored rights to contest election as governor of Kogi State since his name had already been forwarded to INEC (the 1st Respondent) as its candidate for the said election. Legally and logically, if it was the decision of the Court of Appeal and Federal High Court that hindered the Appellant from contesting; the setting aside of those decisions by the Supreme Court revived his already vested right. It will amount with all due respect, to standing logic on its head to argue that a setting aside of those decisions would not confer any benefit on the Appellant irrespective of whether he was a party to the proceedings or not.
It is elementary law that, the appellant ( Jibrin Isah) was a direct party in Marwa V Nyako, as his primary election which the Supreme Court claimed was cancelled, was the central issue in Marwa Vs Nyako contrary to the position of the esteemed justices of the Supreme Court. Let us not forget too that, Marwa Vs Nyako was based on the lower courts judgment in Ibrahim Idris Vs INEC. So, if Marwa Vs Nyako did not affect the appellant, how then did Ibrahim Idris of Kogi State leave office?.
Ekpeyong James Esq.
Lagos
That of TSC is more worrisome as some in that same commission have recieved their 2013 leave bonus for the past 8 months ago.