PDP in the Web of the Courts

Fri, Aug 19, 2016
By publisher
13 MIN READ

BREAKING NEWS, Cover, Featured

– 

The Peoples Democratic Party has put itself in a bind with different court actions initiated by different factions of the party, who obtain conflicting orders, that have thrown the party into confusion

By Anayo Ezugwu  |  Aug 29, 2016 @ 01:00 GMT  |

THE leadership crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, is not ending any time soon. Just when Nigerians are hoping that factionalised members of the party will patch things up at the August 17, national convention of the PDP, a series of court rulings for and against the two feuding factions of the party marred the event. This is in addition to heavy presence of the stern looking policemen which condoned off the venue of the convention, in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, last week.

This made the party leaders to shift the venue to the PDP office in Aba Road, Port Harcourt, where the factional party members led by Senator Ahmed Markafi gathered to extend the tenure of its interim executive to continue in office for one year.

But the Senator Ali Modu Sheriff, factional chairman of the party is not about to allow Markafi have his way with several actions he initiated against them still pending in court. This is because the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Okon Abang, has insisted that the embattled Sheriff, who has been rejected by all the PDP governors, is the authentic leader of the party and not Markarfi.

On the eve of the Port Harcourt convention, Justice Abang had on Tuesday, August 16, issued an interlocutory injunction that would subsist till when the substantive suit before the court was determined. The interlocutory order also mandated the party not to conduct the planned national convention in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.

The judge ordered the inspector-general of police to enforce his order. He also directed that his order be endorsed with Form 48 (notice of disobedience of court order) and served on INEC chairman. He 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 adjourned the hearing of the case till September 7, but gave a stern warning to INEC chairman not to monitor the convention.

Sheriff
Sheriff

Sheriff would have got away with this ruling if the Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt, did not insist that the July 4, ruling of Justice M. Liman that removed him as the party chairman is still valid. The court also held that the appointment of Senator Ahmed Makarfi-led National Caretaker Committee of the party is valid.

According to Justice Watila, the court will not shy away from protecting the sanctity of its judgment. He said that court records showed that the proceedings and order of August 10, 2016, and the interlocutory injunction of August 15, 2016, were served on the defendants with proof of service.

Warning that disobedience to court orders could cause anarchy, Justice Watila stated that the National Caretaker Committee of the PDP remained the executive authority in all matters concerning the party.

But Justice Abang faulted the decision of the Port Harcourt Division of the Federal High Court to assume jurisdiction on the case relating to the PDP convention. He blamed the 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. Therefore, the Port Harcourt division of the Federal High Court cannot make an order neutralising the order made by this court.”

Also frustrated by the court ruling, Sheriff threatened to petition Mahmoud Mohammed, chief Justice of Nigeria, and the National Judicial Council against the unethical behaviour of some judges of the Federal High Court in the country.

Stating that the unnamed judges ought to be removed from the system to restore sanity to Nigeria’s judiciary, Sheriff expressed shocked by the order issued by a Federal High Court in Port Harcourt, in which Justice Watila validated the national convention in the state on the grounds that the July 4, ruling, which upheld the decision taken at the May 21, convention, was still subsisting.

This notwithstanding, the Federal Capital High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday, August 17, restrained Senator Sheriff from further parading himself as the national chairman of PDP. The court said by reason of the judgment of Justice Valentine B. Ashi in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1867/2016 filed by Joseph Jero against the PDP, which nullified the amendment of the provisions of Article 47 (6) of the PDP constitution 2012, Sheriff was not validly elected as national chairman of the PDP abinitio.

The court presided over by Justice Nwamaka Ogbonnaya, re-affirmed the sacking of Sheriff as chairman of PDP on the ground that the judgment of Justice Valentine Ashi which nullified his appointment on June 29, still subsists.

Ekweremadu
Ekweremadu

The court rulings, which worsened the confusion the PDP, started in May and within four months, the aggrieved members of the party have instituted about five cases. Two of the  court cases were instituted by those factions loyal to Sheriff; two others by factions loyal to Markafi and one other case initiated by an independent member of the party also challenging the election of the Sheriff and other executives of the party before they were removed.

Sheriff, Adewale Oladipo, former national secretary, and Fatai Adeyanju, former national auditor, both of PDP, had approached the Federal High Court in Lagos, to stop the PDP convention scheduled for May 21, and also, asked the party not to conduct elections into the office of national chairman, national secretary and national auditor. The three national officers reportedly alleged in the suit that their tenures of office were yet to lapse. Listed as defendants in the suit, alongside the PDP, was the Independent National Electoral Commission.

Consequently, the court gave an order stopping the convention. In its ruling then, the court gave an order of interlocutory injunction as requested by the plaintiffs/applicants restraining the PDP from conducting election into the offices of the national chairman, national secretary and national auditor occupied by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs, respectively, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit; an order of interlocutory injunction to the plaintiffs/applicants restraining the INEC from monitoring and or recognising the conduct of any the 2nd defendant/respondent into the offices of the national chairman, national secretary and national auditor occupied by the three appellants pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.

The same court on May 24, declared invalid, the Ahmed Makarfi-led caretaker committee.  Justice Ibrahim Buba, who gave the ruling, also directed the inspector general of police, IGP, to enforce it. The court ordered the IGP to arrest whoever parades himself as a member of the caretaker committee of the party.

Following on the court ruling in Lagos, the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt, also on May 24, sacked Senator Modu Ali Sheriff and members of his executives. The court restrained Sheriff from parading himself as the PDP national chairman. The order, which was obtained by the Rivers State chapter of the PDP, also restrained INEC from recognising Sheriff and his executive members. It gave legitimacy to the members of the caretaker committee headed by Makarfi. The PDPs suit has as defendants, Sheriff, Oladipo, INEC, the IGP and the Department of State Security, DSS. The PDP had prayed the court to restrain INEC from accepting any names submitted to it by Sheriff and Oladipo. Justice A. L. Liman, who gave the order, said all matters should wait pending the determination of the motion on notice.

 The different court judgements have elicited reactions from Nigerians who bemoan the inability of the PDP to keep its house in order to offer credible opposition to the ruling All Progressives Congress.  Some people have also blamed the judges for granting contradictory injunctions.

However, some prominent Nigerian legal practitioners have strongly defended the judges blaming the politicians for trying to destablise the judiciary. There are some lawyers who also blame the judges for mess in the PDP.

Jiti Ogunye, a lawyer, in an interview with Television Continental, on Wednesday, August 17, expressed concern over the seemingly rising spate of conflicting orders emanating from the Federal High Courts.  Ogunye said, “It’s embarrassing to the judiciary and I think the CJ [chief judge] will have to look at it and tell the judges how to avoid this kind of thing. Of course, it does not portray the judiciary in a good light and the outcome is affecting the society in many ways. The judiciary must be careful not to play into the hands of the politicians.

“Although the facts of the cases may be different because what A takes to court may be different from what B takes to court; parties may be different and issues may be different, although the result may be the same. So, it depends on the fact of each case and one cannot jump to a conclusion that the decisions are conflicting. But at the same time, judges must be careful by not taking decisions that can bring conflict and which will embarrass the judiciary.”

Wike
Wike

Similarly, Vince Ayogu, lawyer, said that the judges can  never rely on media reports in deciding cases before them but rather on facts presented by parties involved in the matter. “In view of what is happening, the blame might not be on the judges but the litigants because if you go to Lagos or Abuja to get an injunction, the injunction given to you will be dependent on the material facts before the court. Then, if the other party involved goes to another court in another state that court must put the other party on notice. If they are put on notice, it’s left for them to inform the court of that case before another court of the same jurisdiction.

“The court must be notified if the case is in another court. The judge doesn’t listen to the media. If I can go to court maybe through an originating summon and take an affidavit that this is my case, it is left for an opponent who have been served to come and tell the court that the case is in another court. If he did not do that, the judge will not depend on media reports in deciding his cases.”

Likewise, Abdulaziz Ibrahim, a lawyer, noted that rather than using the media to inform the judges of pending cases in courts of same jurisdiction, the litigants should rather present their facts before the judges handling their cases.

According to Ibrahim, “PDP is trying to destabilise the judiciary by having many court cases ongoing at the same time. They should stop embarrassing Nigerians and put their house in order.

“I sympathise with some of these judges handling PDP cases I must confess because Nigerians want them to rule based on the media reports. But the judges don’t work that way. Just imagine what will happen in this country if the judges are to decide cases based on reports on newspaper pages or online. They deal with facts, so present your facts and stop accusing them of bias.”

Ogor
Ogor

Despite the court rulings and sealing off of the national convention venue by security agents, the fact remains that the delegates at the convention extended the tenure of the Senator Ahmed Makarfi-led Caretaker Committee by one year. The extension of the tenure of the Makarfi-led Caretaker Committee of the PDP also came on the heels of the suspension of the election of national officers of the party. Motion for the extension of Makarfi’s Caretaker Committee’s tenure was moved by Ike Ekweremadu, Deputy Senate President.

Leo Ogor, minority leader of the House of Representatives, had earlier moved a motion for the suspension of the election of national officers of the party. The motion was, however, seconded by Yunusa Suleiman, who is the chairman of the 36 state chairmen of the PDP across the country.

The PDP noted that the extension of Makarfi-led Caretaker Committee of the PDP would pave the way for the party to exhaust all cases pending in court. Delegates also agreed that the chairman of the committee would not vie for any elective position in the party at the expiration of the one year tenure. Makarfi, in his acceptance speech pledged to sustain the rebuilding of the PDP, reuniting its members and restoring the lost glory of the party.

The party also explained why it did not conduct elections despite its earlier insistence that the convention would hold in compliance with a July 4, Federal High court judgment in Port Harcourt. Prince Dayo Adeyeye, publicity secretary of the National Caretaker Committee, said the party did not want to create any atmosphere of chaos so it went for extension of the tenure of the caretaker committee in place of elections at the convention. Adeyeye said the decision to extend the tenure of the Senator Ahmed Markafi Caretaker Committee had redressed the lacuna that could have arisen if the convention had not held.

Adeyeye said security operatives ignored an interlocutory order from a High Court in Port Harcourt to provide security for the convention, choosing to respect the Abuja High court order. He said security operatives should also have complied with another High court judgment in Abuja that said Sheriff was never a chairman of the party. He further expressed strong hope that the party will come out stronger from the crisis.

Since its formation in 1998, the PDP has oscillated from one crisis to another both at the state and national levels. While in power for 16 years, the party managed to survive the crisis that bedeviled it. Following the party’s loss of the presidency to the All Progressives Congress, APC, in 2015 general elections, it has recorded about 15 cases in different courts across the country.

The current crisis in the party started with blame game over whom and what was responsible for party’s loss of the presidency in the last election. While some party chieftains blamed the party national leadership, others attributed it to the choice of President Goodluck Jonathan as the party candidate in the election, contrary to the party’s zoning principles.

|

Tags: