Ahead of the hearing of the crisis in the leadership of the Peoples
Democratic Party by the Supreme Court, the Senator Ali Modu Sheriff
group has given reason why the court cannot hear an appeal marked:
SC/133/2017 brought before it by the sacked National Caretaker Committee
of the party led by Senator Ahmed Makarfi.
The PDP’s National
Executive Committee led by Sheriff as Chairman and Prof. Wale Oladipo as
Secretary, said the Makarfi Committee, having been declared illegal by
the February 17, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt,
lacked the powers to take decisions for the party, including initiating
court proceedings in its name.
The party made the point in its
written arguments it made in support of an application it filed on March
21, 2017, seeking the striking out of the appeal filed on February 27,
2017 by the Markafi Committee against the February 17 Appeal Court’s
judgment.
The written submission was filed on May 10 in compliance with the Supreme Court’s directive on May 4, 2017.
The
PDP leadership is contending that the Makarfi Committee did not obtain
the necessary authorisation of the PDP to appeal in its name and on its
behalf because the PDP under the current leadership was comfortable with
the Appeal Court judgment and did not intent to challenge it.
It
further contented, in the address written by a group of lawyers led by
Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), that since the Court of Appeal, in its February 17
judgment, declared the Sheriff-led NEC as the authentic leadership
organ of the PDP, the Makarfi-led Committee could no longer pursue an
appeal in the name of the party.
The Sheriff-led PDP leadership
argued that the decision of the Makarfi committee to file an appeal in
the name of the PDP without its (the party’s) authorisation was not only
illegal, it violated the party’s constitution.
Relying on the
provisions of Chapter 5, Articles 35(1), 36(1) and 42(1) of the PDP
constitution, it argued that the party, with a corporate personality,
could only act through the principal national officer, whose powers and
functions are stated in the constitution.
It referred to a May 18,
2016 judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital territory (FCT)
in suit No: FCT/HC/CV/1443/2016, ordering a return to status quo as at
May 18, 2016 and the subsequent judgment of the Federal High Court in
suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/464/2016, to the effect that only the Sheriff NEC
could instruct lawyers for the party, and urged the Supreme Court not to
hear the appeal.
The
Sheriff-led PDP leadership noted that it has not by its argument said
the Makarfi Committee cannot appeal the May 17 judgment of the Appeal
Court, having been parties in the case from the trial court, it (the
Makarfi Committee) or its members could only appeal as interested
parties after first obtaining the court’s leave to so appeal.
In a
counter argument, the Makarfi Committee, represented by a group of
lawyers led by Wole Olanipekun (SAN), wants the court to discountenance
the Sheriff NEC’s arguments and proceed to hear its appeal, in which it
among others urged the Supreme Court to set aside the Appeal Court
judgment of February 17.
In its reply argument dated May 15, 2017,
the Makarfi Committee queried the legitimacy of the application filed
by the Sheriff-led NEC and argued that it was not only strange, but
intended to frustrate the hearing of the main appeal.
It argued
that it was wrong for Sheriff and others, who had briefed Akin Olujinmi
(SAN) to represent them in the substantive appeal and had filed a
respondents’ brief, in which they also made similar arguments in
relation to the competence of the appeal, cannot again brief Fagbemi to
ask the court not to hear the appeal but to strike it out.
Relying
on Order 8 Rule 6 (1), (2) and (4) of the Supreme Court’s Rules, the
Makarfi Committee faulted the March 15, 2017 letter of the Sheriff-led
NEC applying to withdraw the appeal and the subsequent application for
its strike out.
It argued that since the appeal was not filed by Sheriff and others, they lacked the right to apply to withdraw it.
The
Makarfi Committee argued that it was still a valid body with the power
to file the appeal despite the Appeal Court judgment of February 17,
2017, because it was a creation of PDP’s highest decision making body,
the National Convention, which disbanded the Sheriff-led NEC and
preplaced it with the national Caretaker Committee.
In a response
on point of law, filed by Fagbemi on May 18, the Sheriff-led NEC faulted
all legal arguments by the Makarfi Committee, urged the court to
discountenance its contention and hold that it lacked the locus standi
to file an appeal in the name of the PDP, having been sacked by a
subsisting judgment.
No comments:
Post a Comment