South West leaders in Sheriff’s camp urge Supreme Court to halt further appeal proceedings

• Seek disbandment of fresh panel, PDP rejects Poroye’s petition

Members of states executives of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in six South West States (loyal to Senator Ali-Modu Sheriff) have kicked against the reconstituted panel of Appeal Court to hear appeals relating to the governorship candidate crises of the party in Ondo State.

Led by the factional chairman of the party in Ondo State, Biyi Poroye, the group asked the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, to disband the new panel comprising Justices Ibrahim Salauwa, Ignatius Igwe Aguba and George Mbaba, as according to them, it was allegedly set up in breach of the applicant’s right to fair hearing guaranteed under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.

The petition written against the earlier panel by Poroye, wherein he accused the panel of compromise, necessitated the decision of the Appeal Court to reconstitute the panel.

But the National Caeraker Committer of the PDP yesterday distance itself from a petition written by Poroye against the Justice Jummai Sankey-led Appeal Panel.

The party, in a statement by its spokesman, Prince Dayo Adeyeye, said that PDP will never wage war against the judiciary, but would continue to hold it in high respect an independent and impartial arm of government.

But Poroye and others, in a motion filed yesterday at the Supreme Court, also prayed the apex court to order the return of the case files relating to the appeals as well as the application filed by Eyitayo Jegede (SAN) for leave to appeal as an interested party against the decision of the Federal High Court of October 14.

The appeals pending before the Court of Appeal include that of CA/A/551/2016 filed by Ahmed Makarfi and Ben Obi against Biyi Poroye and 10 others, that of suit no CA/A/551A/2016 filed by Clement Faboyede and Another against 10 others; appeal no. CA/A551B/2016 filed by the PDP against Biyi Poroye and nine others as well as that with file no CA/A/551C/2016 filed by Eyitayo Jegede against Prince Biyi Poroye and 10 others.

The group in the new motion argued that the President of Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab Bulkachuw did not only act without hearing from them, the case, being a pre-election matter did not warrant any urgency to require the constitution of a special panel.

They added that those who filed the appeals against the June 29 and October 14, decisions of Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja, were not parties in the cases leading to the decisions.

The applicants also argued that no orders were made against any of them (those behind the new appeals) and that they (the applicants), who were plaintiffs in the suits, were not informed when the President of the Court of Appeal acted solely on the request by the appellants to constitute the panel on the ground of urgency.

They have also filed a motion before the Supreme Court, seeking a stay of all proceedings before the Court of Appeal in relation to the appeals, pending the determination of the two appeals they filed on October 31, which have entered and given number: SC/914/2016 and SC/915/2016.

The motion filed by two members of the Party, Benson Akingboye and Ehiozuwa Agbonayiwa, particularly seeks stay of “all further proceedings and further hearing in CA/ABJ/402A/2016 filed on behalf of PDP by a lawyer engaged by Ahmed Makarfi-led faction of the Party’s leadership.

The group in yesterday’s motion hinged their application on the ground that it was wrong to allow the Court of Appeal to proceed with the appeals when they have valid appeals before the Supreme Court, which challenged the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal.

“As the first and second respondents in the lower court, they (Akingboye and Agbonayiwa) challenged, by way of preliminary objection, the validity of the appeal which originated the appeal at the court below.

“Apart from the said objection, there arose in the court below the issue of representation for the Peoples Democratic Party as two counsel laid conflicting claims to being the counsel authorized by the said party to act for it in this appeal.

“Neither the said preliminary objections of the applicants herein nor the said issue of which particular legal practitioner is authorized to represent the PDP was resolved before the court below fixed the substantive appeal for hearing.

“By fixing the substantive appeal for hearing, the court below thereby postponed the ruling or decision on it until the hearing of the whole appeal or case.

“The interlocutory appeal is capable of disposing of, or terminating, the substantive appeal.

“This application could not be first brought at the court below due to the fact that the appeal had been entered at the Supreme Court when it was filed,” they said.

The appeal at the Supreme Court, filed on October 31, by Akingboye and Agbonayiwa was against the October 29 decision by the former panel of the Court of Appeal led by Justice Jumai Sankey in which it ordered accelerated hearing in the appeals.

They raised four grounds in their notice of appeal, the first being that the Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law by their failure to first determine vital issue of jurisdiction raised in their (the appellants’) preliminary objection that their is no valid notice of appeal filed in the court below.

The appellants faulted the former panel of the Court of Appeal for fixing the substantive Appeal for hearing when the issue of which counsel to represent the PDP (in whose name the appeal was filed) had not been resolved.

They also faulted the Sankey-led panel for granting a relief in the motion for accelerated hearing of the case in the court bellow, which the motion was defective and devoid of address for service.

No date has been fixed for hearing of the appeal filed for the appellant by B.E.I. Nwofor (SAN).