Sagay seeks review of Supreme Court verdicts on Zamfara, Rivers

Sagay seeks review of Supreme Court verdicts on Zamfara, Rivers

Eminent Professor of Law Itse Sagay (SAN) has urged the All Progressives Congress (APC) legal team to apply to the Supreme Court for a review of its judgments on Zamfara and Rivers States.

In Rivers, the APC was excluded from fielding candidates during the general elections following a Supreme Court judgment.

In the case of Zamfara, the Supreme Court on April 24 nullified APC’s victory in the election and transferred it to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) due to alleged irregularities in APC’s primaries.

To Sagay, the verdicts are a travesty of justice.

He said in a statement: β€œThe Zamfara and Rivers State judgments are a national tragedy. We should not allow our legal system to throw up such unimaginable injustice.

β€œThis major judicial disenfranchisement of the Zamfara and Rivers electorate should be reversed. I advise the APC legal team to apply for a review of the two judgments.

β€œTheir Lordships ought to be given an opportunity to reverse this unprecedented tragedy.

β€œThe prefix β€˜Justice’ preceding he names of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal Judges is significant, for it prescribes what they stand for and what they represent: Justice!”

Sagay pointed out that in the governorship election in Zamfara, the APC candidate scored well over 500,000 votes whilst the PDP candidate scored just over 100,000 votes.

He noted the APC won all three Senate seats in the state, seven House of Representative seats and 24 State House of Assembly seats.

The statement reads in part: β€œBy this judgment, the landslide APC victories in the governorship, Senate, House of Representative and State House of Assembly are transferred to the PDP.

See also  EXPOSED: Bribery scandal rocks Justice Akanbi-led Election Petition Tribunal in Akwa Ibom State

β€œIf the APC primaries were defective, should the electorate be deprived of their democratic and Constitutional rights to vote? Is the electorate to be punished for the transgressions of party officials?

β€œShould the Judiciary replace the electorate’s decision and install losers in office? Could the Judiciary not have drawn on the deep recesses of its intellectual capacity, authority and its inexorable commitment to justice, to prevent this undemocratic calamity?

β€œCan the APC officials not be punished, for their lapses without denying the electorate their democratic rights? Should the Judiciary take over the electoral rights of the electorate? Is this not a clear case of technical law completely overthrowing justice?

β€œHave the members of the Supreme Court not achieved a level of creativity and authority to provide a solution without burying democracy and taking over from the registered voters as the judicial electorate?

β€œIf this judgment had been an international one, it could have been described as β€˜shocking the conscience of humanity’. In this case, it shocks the conscience of Nigerian humanity.”

Citing several authorities, Sagay said the Supreme Court is specially endowed with the power and authority to do justice and to ignore law when it is technical and would create injustice, and to avoid at all cost a mechanical approach to the interpretation of the law.

β€œNow, has justice been served in Rivers and Zamfara states? No! In one case innocent electorate in their hundreds of thousands were prevented from voting for their party by judicial order.

β€œIn Zamfara, where voting took place, the verdict of the electorate was taken away from the victorious party and awarded by the Judiciary to the woeful losers.

See also  Ambode handsover reins of government to Sanwoolu

β€œIn the next four years, Zamfara State will be governed by a party and politicians rejected by the electorate. This indeed shocks the conscience of Nigerian humanity.”

He also referred to Section 140(1) – (3) of the Electoral Act, which prohibits any court from declaring a loser of an election elected even if the person with the highest votes was not validly elected.

β€œI am not interested in the provisions of the Electoral Act 2010. I am only deeply concerned and interested in the fundamental and peremptory principle of Justice.

β€œNo Judge should announce his judgment until he is satisfied that Justice has been served, no matter how strong the pull of mechanical and technical law,” Sagay added. Copied.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.