Justice Taiwo Taiwo halted delivery of the judgment, yesterday, to enable him consider implications of a fresh Court of Appeal judgment on defection related matters.
The Court of Appeal, Enugu division, had, five days ago, held that defection does not constitute any known offence but rather falls under constitutional rights of freedom of association, as enshrined in Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution.
Ayade and his deputy had defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to All Progressives Congress (APC), prompting PDP to demand that their seats be declared vacant in a lawsuit.
Mike Ozekhome, counsel to the governor, had, in a letter, drawn the attention of the Federal High Court to the Court of Appeal judgment and prayed the court to respect the decision of the higher Court of Appeal on defection related matters.
The senior lawyer, while addressing the court on effects of the Court of Appeal judgment on the defection suit against Ayade, asked Justice Taiwo to apply the higher court decision to dismiss the case against his client.
Ozekhome drew the attention of the judge to a portion of the Court of Appeal judgment, which held that under the amended Constitution, votes cast in any election belong to individuals and not political parties.
He further pointed out a portion to Justice Taiwo where the Court of Appeal held that political parties are agents of individuals and just vehicles for individual contestants to canvas for votes.
Ozekhome insisted that Sections 180, 188 and 189 of the 1999 Constitution can only be invoked by the court to remove an elected governor, only where such governor resigns, dies or is impeached by a state House of Assembly.
He added that the Supreme Court had, in recent decisions, made it clear that defection is immoral, improper, ugly and condemnable but did not constitute an offence that can lead to removal of elective public officeholders.
Earlier, PDP counsel, Emmanuel Ukala, had argued that the facts of the case, which led to the Court of Appeal’s new judgment, are fundamentally different from the suit of his client.
Ukala informed that the Court of Appeal’s new decision was based on a suit by APC against APC, whereas the instant suit is PDP against APC.
He further submitted that PDP was not a party in the Court of Appeal decision; hence, the new judgment is not binding on it for the simple reason of lack of fairness.
Ukala urged the judge to hold that defection constitutes an offence, amounting to the abdication of duties, as a party with minority votes should not be allowed to rule over the party with majority votes.
