Another big day is here again as the supreme court will deliver judgement on the case between the APC candidate in the March 9 governorship election, Nsima Ekere and Gov. Udom Emmanuel of the PDP.
This comes after the Election Petition Tribunal in Uyo and the Court of Appeal in Calabar delivered judgements in favour of Gov. Emmanuel.
Dissatisfied by the judgements, Nsima Ekere approached the supreme court, perhaps for a miracle to happen. But every student of law knows that this case does not demand any miracle as judges both at the election petition tribunal and the court of appeal spoke unanimously that Ekere has not enough evidences to prove the case – it was subsequently dismissed.
His stances were that the election was invalid by reason of corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 (amended), and that the winner of the election – Governor Emmanuel – was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election.
He therefore averred that the declaration of Mr. Udom Emmanuel as winner of the March 9 governorship election in Akwa Ibom State was unlawful, null, void and of no effect.
Subsequently, he posited that it be determined and declared that the said governorship election of March 9, 2019 and the return of Governor Emmanuel by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) were invalid by reasons of corrupt practices, non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended), Electoral Amendment Act, 2015 as well as violation and breach of various provisions of the said Electoral Act, 2010, Electoral Amendment Act, 2015, the INEC regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of the2019 Governorship Election and the manual.
He also prayed that it be determined and declared Gov. Emmanuel did not score and could not have scored majority of lawful votes cast in at least two thirds of the thirty one Local Government Areas in Akwa lbom State at the governorship election held on March 9, 2019 adding again that his return by the INEC was unconstitutional, irregular, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
Ekere, among other things also prayed the Court to order the conduct of a fresh election in the state except in Etim Ekpo and Essien Udim Local Government Areas where elections were conducted at the Polling Units and results announced.
Unfortunately for him, following due consideration and thorough investigation on the case, the Tribunal dismissed the Petition and affirmed the return of Mr. Emmanuel.
Not satisfied, Ekere took his case to the Court of Appeal, essentially contending that the Tribunal wrongly rejected his documents and that sufficient witnesses were not called to establish his claims.
The Court of Appeal, Calabar Division, justly heard his appeal and sustained the decision of the Tribunal which did not also appease the petitioner as he approached the Supreme Court.
The question is, what will the Supreme Court judges see differently which previous judges did not see?
It is not possible for a case to be tagged a decomposing corpse (meaning it was dead on arrival) and at the same time become alive. Perhaps, Prophet Ezekiel would be among the judges at the supreme court where the biblical dry bones will rise again.
Never in law has evidences based on hearsay been given value or considered valid. All arguments by the APC, including their witnesses were based on what people told them, and such evidences are inadmissible in proof of the petition.
This alone is potent enough for the case to die a natural death. The prayer by Ekere for an order to nullify the governorship election in the state, and an order for INEC to conduct fresh governorship election cannot be sustained as there is no evidence to prove that the election was marred by violence and electoral fraud.
This makes the job easier for the judges.
It must be noted that Nsima Ekere and his party did not prepare for this legal outing, as it were during the election. This is evident in the fact that there were lots of disagreement among their counsels, including the petitioner. This is what happens when one tries to suffocate the truth. It will keep screaming because it cannot be killed; even when it appears as if it is robbed of life and buried, it will resurface.
The evidences presented to the Lower Tribunal, reports say, were discountenanced due to improper certifications. “It is trite law that copies of public documents are to be mandatorily certified before they can be admitted as Exhibits. The payment of legally prescribed Fees is an essential requirement such certification”, the Supreme Court’s document says.
Moreso, the exhibits were neither linked nor demonstrated through their witnesses and wasn’t related to any aspect of their case, the document adds, informing that “there was no proof that proper payment, which is a prerequisite to due certification, was made on the documents”.
It is therefore safe to say that “the exhibits were not ultimately available for the due consideration of the Tribunal and by extension the Court of Appeal, not having been demonstrated by competent witnesses at the trial”.
An election adjudged as peaceful and credible by local and international observers cannot be seen by one person as marred by violence. Though Nsima Ekere may still uphold that the judges erred in law, one would wonder what he meant by that and how knowledgeable he is when it comes to law.
While we anticipate the supreme court to give its verdict today, we are not unaware of the arguments from both ends, and can convincingly say that justice will have its way.
