The
leadership of the Independent National Electoral Commission on Tuesday
was confused on whether to monitor or stay away from Wednesday’s (today)
national convention of the Peoples Democratic Party in Port Harcourt,
Rivers State.
Justice Okon Abang of a Federal High Court in Abuja
on Tuesday had insisted that the PDP must stop its planned national
convention.
The judge gave a stern warning to the Chairman of
INEC, Prof. Mahood Yakubu, not to monitor the convention. The judge also
ordered the Inspector-General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, to enforce the
court’s order.
Justice Abang’s order is contrary to another order
by Justice Ibrahim Watila of the Port Harcourt Division of the Federal
High Court, directing the IGP to monitor the convention.
Warning
that the disobedience of court orders could cause anarchy, Justice
Watila pointed out that the National Caretaker Committee of the PDP
remained the executive authority in all matters concerning the party.
Our
correspondent, who visited the headquarters of the commission in Abuja
on Tuesday, was told by some national commissioners that INEC was in a
dilemma over which order of the different courts it should obey
concerning the convention.
It was learnt that the commission had
sent a delegation to Port Harcourt, based on the Rivers State court
ruling, mandating it to monitor the convention.
The ruling of
Justice Okon Abang on Tuesday, insisting that INEC must stay away from
the convention, was said to have put the commission in a dilemma over
what to do.
One of the national commissioners, who spoke on
condition of anonymity, said while the commission was willing to obey
court orders, the two judgments had put it in a state of confusion.
He
said, “ We have just been told that we should not be at the convention
on the order of Justice Abang. Yet, another court in Port Harcourt said
we must be there. These are same courts with same powers under the same
President, because the Federal High Court in the country is headed by a
President.
“Are these judges reading different laws or constitution? Can’t the President of the Federal High Court call his men to order?
“If
we go to Port Harcourt for the convention, a judge will say we flouted
his order and if we don’t go, another one will frown at our action.”
The
Director, Publicity and Voters Education, INEC, Mr. Oluwole Osaze, told
our correspondent that the commission was waiting to be served with the
order of Justice Abang before deciding on the next step to take.
He
said, “We are in dilemma over which order to obey for now. One order
asks us to go, another says we should not. We are waiting to be served
with the order of Justice Abang before knowing what to do.”
A
deputy director in the same department, Mr. Nick Danzang, said the
officials of the commission were on standby in Port Harcourt.
He
said, “Although the commission has been served the Port Harcourt court
judgment, it has yet to be served the Abuja court judgment by Justice
Abang.
“In the meantime, our monitoring workers are on standby.”
Don’t monitor PDP convention, judge warns INEC
Justice
Abang had on Tuesday turned the interim order, stopping the PDP
national convention, into an interlocutory injunction that would subsist
till when the substantive suit was determined
He adjourned the
hearing of the case till September 7, 2016, but gave a stern warning to
INEC chairman not to monitor the convention.
The judge also ordered the Inspector-General of Police to enforce his order.
Justice
Abang, who faulted the decision of the Port Harcourt Division of the
Federal High Court to assume jurisdiction on the case relating to the
PDP convention, also directed that his order be endorsed with Form 48
(notice of disobedience of court order) and served on INEC chairman.
Justice
Abang said failure by INEC or any of the defendants to comply with his
order would ‘‘attract disciplinary action provided the plaintiffs know
what to do.”
He said the Ahmed Makarfi-led caretaker committee
members, who were on Tuesday joined as the third to the ninth
respondents, adopted a strategy of not filing a counter-affidavit,
adding that other processes were not found in the court file.
“They must sink and float with their legal strategy,” the judge said.
Justice
Abang said the request for an adjournment by their counsel, Mr. Yunus
Ustaz (SAN) and Chief Ferdinand Orbih (SAN), after the plaintiffs’
counsel, Chief Adeniyi Akintola (SAN), had moved a motion for an
interlocutory injunction, was an afterthought.
Justice Abang
ruled, “ The facts deposed to by the plaintiffs are credible and
deserving to be granted the application in the overall interest of
justice. I so hold…
“I make the following orders:
“An
order of interlocutory injunction is hereby made restraining the
defendants (the nine of them), their servants, agents, howsoever named
from conducting the national convention of the PDP and from supervising
or monitoring same under any guise and for electing any national officer
of the (second) defendant (PDP), and for recognising same in any manner
whatsoever, pending the determination of the substantive suit.
“An
order of interlocutory injunction is, hereby, made restraining the PDP
from presenting anybody and from sponsoring anybody for election into
its offices and holding national convention, conference, whatever name
for the purpose of electing national officers of the second defendant,
pending the determination of this suit…
“An order of
interlocutory injunction is, hereby, made restraining INEC from
monitoring the national convention of the PDP scheduled for Port
Harcourt on Wednesday, August 17, 2016, or any other day and from
accepting, publishing or recognising, conference or convention howsoever
named being planned by the second defendant.
“The Inspector-General of Police shall enforce the order until all applications are disposed of.
“The plaintiffs shall endorse Form 48 and serve all the defendants, especially INEC, to accompany the order.
“Learned
counsel for INEC shall inform the chairman of INEC of the court’s
decision and failure to comply with the order of the court will attract
disciplinary action against any party in disobedience, provided the
plaintiffs know what to do.
“Any party that fails to comply with
the subsisting order of this court shall have himself to blame. Nobody
should bring himself into direct confrontation with this court.”
The judge blamed the Port Harcourt division of the Federal High Court for the conflicting orders.
He said the attitude of his colleague had been condemned by the Supreme Court in 2004.
“This
unenviable situation would have been avoided if the judge in the Port
Harcourt division of the court had refused to assume jurisdiction over a
case filed on August 9 after the Abuja division was already handling a
similar case filed in July.
He said, “Therefore, the Port
Harcourt division of the Federal High Court cannot make an order
neutralising the order made by this court.”
Source:
http://punchng.com/
