House Minority Caucus Condemns Appeal Court Judgements in Plateau, Kaduna

Adedayo Akinwale in Abuja

The Minority Caucus in the House of Representatives has condemned the judgement of the justices of Appeal Court in both Kaduna and Plateau states, describing it as unfortunate and unacceptable.

Its Leader, Hon.  Kingsley Chinda, in a statement issued yesterday maintained that the recent judgments of the Appeal Court which removed opposition lawmakers from Plateau and Kaduna states in the House eroded public interest and called to question the impartiality of the judiciary.

He said: “We were shocked that the Justices of the Appeal Court delivered judgements that are not only conflicting but negates proven and established legal precedence.

“With due respect to the justices, the grounds in which the Justices reached their unfortunate and regrettable judgments are totally unacceptable, ludicrous, capricious and out rightly unlawful. The obvious illogic which characterised the judgments falls short of our constitutional and electoral jurisprudence.”

Chinda said despite the well established jurisprudence on pre-election matters, “the justices decided to side-track, neglect, and jettison established precedents clearly and explicitly delivered by the Supreme Court.

He added: “It is  not only sad and painful but shameful that the justices, in their warped wisdom, gave such patently prejudiced and inconsistent judgements without respect for existing substantive and procedural law.”

The minority leader maintained that since there were many pronouncements by the Supreme Court on pre-election and similar issues, it is binding on all parties.

Chinda noted that having laid this very necessary and useful background, one could  safely conclude that the actions and decisions of the justices in Plateau and Kaduna states are a travesty, and calls to questions the time-tested and serially-proven attributes of the judiciary as an impartial, responsive and transparent body.

He emphasised that the conflicting judgements are insensitive, repulsive, insidious, and tantamount to gross abuse of judicial process.

Chinda recalled that in May 2023, in PDP versus Kashim Shettima, the Supreme Court, in dismissing the appeal, ruled that, “you cannot challenge a political party over structure even if it does not have the structure.

He said the Supreme Court dismissed Allied Peoples Mandate’s suit against the Independent National Electoral Commission on the same ground. In October 2023,  the Appeal Court, in strict adherence to established jurisprudence, dismissed a matter by All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate for a House of Representatives seat in Borno state against the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

The minority leader said Justice Chioma Nwosu-Iheme in her lucid and clear judgement held that the appropriate place to challenge the nomination, sponsorship and qualification of a candidate is the High Court, not Tribunal or Appeal Court or any other Court.

While expressing worry about the implications of the conflicting judgements by the appeal court justices, Chinda declared that, if left unchecked and promptly addressed, it might have far-reaching impacts on the judiciary and democracy in Nigeria.

“This would discredit, portray and give the judiciary very negative  image. The trust and impartiality character of the judiciary would be completely eroded. These anomalies would not only call to question our values as a people and country but may have negative effects on the growth and deepening of democracy,” he said.