The Supreme Court has scheduled judgment for October 21 in the dispute over who should contest the next governorship election in Delta State on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
A five-member panel of the Supreme Court presided over by Justice Amina Augie announced the date after hearing arguments from lawyers to parties in the appeal filed by David Edevbie against the August 29 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja.
READ ALSO: N5bn fraud: Malami gives EFCC approval to prosecute Stella Oduah, others
The Court of Appeal had, in its judgment reversed the July 7 judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja which voided the nomination of Speaker Sheriff Oborevwori.
Oborevwori came first in the party’s governorship primary election held on May 25 but Edevbie challenged Oborevwori’s nomination, claiming that he (Oborevwori) submitted false documents to the PDP, by virtue of which he ought not to be allowed to participate in the primary.
In a judgment on July 7, 2022 Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja upheld Edevbie’s claims and voided Oborevwori’s nomination, a decision that was reversed on August 29, 2022 by the Court of Appeal in Abuja.
Arguing his client’s case at the Supreme Court, Tayo Oyetibo (SAN) for the appellant (Edevbie) urged the court to allow the appeal.
Oyetibo argued that, contrary to the contention by Oborevwori and the PDP, the suit was properly commenced at the trial court via an originating summons in compliance with the practice direction issued by the Chief Judge.
He urged the court to uphold the findings of the trial court and set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
Lawyers to Oborevwori and the PDP – Damian Dodo (SAN) and A. M. Aliyu (SAN) prayed the court to dismiss the appeal.
They argued, among others, that the suit by Edevbie was premature because it was filed before Oborevwori’s alleged false documents were submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) by the PDP.
Aliyu said: “We (the PDP) are placed in a peculiar situation. At the primary, an aspirant scored 500 and the other scored 100, but the trial court wanted us to sponsor the less popular candidate.
“We are in the business of winning the election, so we would not prefer the less popular candidate.
“The submission of false documents to a political party is not a ground for disqualification,” Aliyu said, adding that a candidate could only be disqualified where it is found that he/she submitted false documents to INEC and not to his party.”
Aliyu added that Edevbie ought to have waited for the documents to be submitted to INEC, so the suit is premature, adding that “the submission required for disqualification is when the documents are submitted to INEC.”
Aliyu also faulted the mode of commencing the suit at the trial court, arguing that since the plaintiff made a criminal allegation of forgery, he ought to prove beyond reasonable doubt by calling witnesses to testify.
He argued that Edevbie ought to have commenced the suit via a writ of summons as against an originating summons, which would have required that the institutions that issued the alleged false academic documents are invited to either confirm or deny the said certificates.