https://www.nairaland.com/7030490/defection-why-umahi-deputy-may

In response to the above thread, i strongly believe that Umahi and Deputy will WIN and TRIUMPH at the appeal court. This is because you cannot build something on nothing and expect it to stand.

The case of Amaechi vs Omehia as cited by Sagay does not arise in this instance because that was a Pre-election matter and in this case we neither dealing with a Pre-election matter handled by ordinary courts nor Post-election matter handled by the election tribunals.

Second, the issue before the supreme court in the case of Amaechi vs Omehia was to determine who was the lawful and rightful candidate of the PDP in the said election and the supreme court said it was Amaechi because in the eyes of the law he was never substituted.

However in this case the question is not about who is the candidate in an election but rather what happens to a candidate who participated in an election, won the election, sworn in and later changed party by way of defection of which the Nigerian Constitution is silent on such matters.

Thus, the judgement by Justice Inyang Ekwo cannot stand at the appellate court because like i said earlier you cannot build something on nothing and expect it to stand.

Which defection law in our constitution did justice Inyang base his judgement on?

The judge simply embarked on judicial voyage and activism to create a new law which does not exist and the Supreme court in plethora of cases frowns at such adventure. In the case of Attorney General of the Federation V. Abubakar (2007) 10 NWLR (part 1041) 1. At page 124 of the report, Justice Onnoghen set down the position thus:

It is the constitutional responsibility of the legislature to make or amend the laws including the constitution, where the need arises, while that of the judiciary remains to interpret and apply the laws so made or amended. The courts can therefore not add or subtract from the law as enacted by the legislature under the guise of judicial interpretation of the constitution or statute…”

The judgement also erroneously relied on Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court in Faleke v. INEC. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court decision in Faleke v. INEC does not relate to the consequence of the defection of a governor from one political party to the other.

A more apt instance will be the Atiku Abubakar scenario wherein Atiku Abubakar as Vice President, elected under the PDP, defected to the then Action Congress.

The position of the Supreme Court was clearly stated in Attorney General of the Federation V. Abubakar (2007) 10 NWLR (part 1041) 1 where Justice Onnoghen held thus:

“There is nowhere in the 1999 Constitution where it is stated that the President or Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be removed or is removable from that office if he defects from the political party on whose platform he was elected to that office and joins another political party.”

There is also the question of Jurisdiction i.e whether a civil or criminal proceedings can be brought in the case of a sitting Governor covered by immunity clause of the Nigerian constitution.

My humble submission others are free to add theirs

The Appellate Court in an unanimous judgement delivered by a three-man Panel (Justices A O Belgore, J O K Oyewole and Sybil Nwaka-Gbagi), held that, the defection of a political office holder may appear immoral, but it was not the duty of the Court to embark on investigation or probe into the provisions of the laws, warning that judicial activism must not be turned into judicial rascality.

The Appellate Court further held that there is no provision in sections 180, 188 or 189 of the 1999 constitution as amended, that empowers the Court to remove either a seating governor or the deputy.

According to the learned Justices, defection of an office holder is not novel to Nigeria’s judicial jurisprudence

Umahi vs Ogboji, 2022

Recall, What killed the card reader in 2015 at the supreme court? It was simply because it was not in our constitution irrespective of the beautiful arguments put forward then like deepening our democracy and also being in the INEC guidelines and manuals. The supreme court dismissed those beautiful arguments based on the fact that it is not recognized by our laws. This is what will happen in this case irrespective of what anybody says.

Op kahal29, you have come again. When result come out now, you will disappear or switch monicker.
This was how u gave the pastor in edo state hope , until he lost Everywhere. Neither were you seen anywhere.

Before nko

That there's no precedence upon which to base this case doesn't mean that this Umahi's case won't serve as precedence.

Massiveglory:
Op kahal29, you have come again. When result come out now, you will disappear or switch monicker.
This was how u gave the pastor in edo state hope , until he lost Everywhere. Neither were you seen anywhere.

In Edo election we were all being optimistic and hoping for the best where by it can either go your way or any other way. However in this Umahi's case we talking about what the law says and what it did not say. Simple and Short

Bobloco:
That there's no precedence upon which to base this case doesn't mean that this Umahi's case won't become precedence.

How?

Based on which Law?

Recall, What killed the card reader in 2015 at the supreme court? It was simply because it was not in our constitution irrespective of the beautiful arguments put forward then like deepening our democracy and also being in the INEC guidelines and manuals. The supreme court dismissed those beautiful arguments based on the fact that it is not recognized by our laws. This is what will happen in this case irrespective of what anybody says.

So i want to know how that will happen when the supreme court has already stated it's position thus:

It is the constitutional responsibility of the legislature to make or amend the laws including the constitution, where the need arises, while that of the judiciary remains to interpret and apply the laws so made or amended. The courts can therefore not add or subtract from the law as enacted by the legislature under the guise of judicial interpretation of the constitution or statute…”

So am still wondering how Umahi's case will set a precedence and become a new law.

Can the defection of a Governor/Deputy-Governor/President/Vice-President lead to his/her removal from Office?

NO.

kahal29:


How?

Based on which Law?

Recall, What killed the card reader in 2015 at the supreme court? It was simply because it was not in our constitution irrespective of the beautiful arguments put forward then like deepening our democracy and also being in the INEC guidelines and manuals. The supreme court dismissed those beautiful arguments based on the fact that it is not recognized by our laws. This is what will happen in this case irrespective of what anybody says.

So i want to know how that will happen when the supreme court has already stated it's position thus:

It is the constitutional responsibility of the legislature to make or amend the laws including the constitution, where the need arises, while that of the judiciary remains to interpret and apply the laws so made or amended. The courts can therefore not add or subtract from the law as enacted by the legislature under the guise of judicial interpretation of the constitution or statute…”

So am still wondering how Umahi's case will set a precedence and become a new law.

.... You ve said it all. The judgment by Ekwo was based on moral grounds but the truth of the matter is that both the political parties and our Constitution did not capture the issues of defection inrespect of the executives so I'm still wondering where the judge based his judgement from.

We should also understand that the constitution of a country supercedes every other laws

Any judgment passed by the supreme court invariably becomes law. The supreme court has on many occasions held that the votes belong to the political party. The case of PDP (James Faleke) vs APC (Yahaya Bello) is even recent. The Ebonyi people voted for PDP on 9/03/19. How come in 2021 to date is APC that is in power in the state? If the votes belong to the candidate, gov Umahi has the right to take his votes to any political party. You can't take another party mandate and give another party. I believe, Ebonyians voted for umahi because he was in the PDP and if he was in APC, they wouldn't have voted for him.

fergie001:
Can the defection of a Governor/Deputy-Governor/President/Vice-President lead to his/her removal from Office?

NO.

Simple and Short.

Case Dismissed.

JONNYSPUTE:
.... You ve said it all. The judgment by Ekwo was based on moral grounds but the truth of the matter is that both the political parties and our Constitution did not capture the issues of defection inrespect of the executives so I'm still wondering where the judge based his judgement from.

We should also understand that the constitution of a country supercedes every other laws

And there is no morality in law. In fact, Law and morality are two parallel lines that can never meet.

jimter44:
Any judgment passed by the supreme court invariably becomes law. The supreme court has on many occasions held that the votes belong to the political party. The case of PDP (James Faleke) vs APC (Yahaya Bello) is even recent. The Ebonyi people voted for PDP on 9/03/19. How come in 2021 to date is APC that is in power in the state? If the votes belong to the candidate, gov Umahi has the right to take his votes to any political party. You can't take another party mandate and give another party. I believe, Ebonyians voted for umahi because he was in the PDP and if he was in APC, they wouldn't have voted for him.

The case of James Faleke vs Bello does not apply here because it is still trying to determine who the candidate of a political party should be NOT what happens when the candidate is sworn in as an elected Governor and he defects to another political party.

kahal29:


And there is no morality in law. In fact, Law and morality are two parallel lines that can never meet.

... Exactly

Bobloco:
That there's no precedence upon which to base this case doesn't mean that this Umahi's case won't serve as precedence.

It is not just about precedence but about the law. Is the judgement based on any known law?

So you see, it’s about law and not just precedence. There is no law backing the decision of that High court judge and hence, the judgement cannot stand.

jimter44:
Any judgment passed by the supreme court invariably becomes law. The supreme court has on many occasions held that the votes belong to the political party. The case of PDP (James Faleke) vs APC (Yahaya Bello) is even recent. The Ebonyi people voted for PDP on 9/03/19. How come in 2021 to date is APC that is in power in the state? If the votes belong to the candidate, gov Umahi has the right to take his votes to any political party. You can't take another party mandate and give another party. I believe, Ebonyians voted for umahi because he was in the PDP and if he was in APC, they wouldn't have voted for him.

The case is not about determining who is the candidate of the party but about what happens to a duly elected governor after defecting to another party. The only relevant Supreme Court judgement in this case is that of AGF vs Atiku Abubakar and the court stated clearly that defection is not a ground for removing elected president, vp and governors.

There is a reason we call candidates flag bearers.

They don have the votes, they only carry the flag.

Our constitution says a candidate must be sponsored by a party to be eligible to run.

The Supreme Court has always ruled that parties own the votes.

Amechi vs Omehia is the lastest precedence not the Atiku case which happened earlier

seunmsg:


The case is not about determining who is the candidate of the party but about what happens to a duly elected governor after defecting to another party. The only relevant Supreme Court judgement in this case is that of AGF vs Atiku Abubakar and the court stated clearly that defection is not a ground for removing elected president, vp and governors.

Amechi vs Omehia is the lastest precedence

Read the verdict

Ridiculous thread.

We are waiting for the Supreme Court to contradict itself having given express ruling on similar matters in the recent past.

Let someone step up to prove at the Supreme Court that votes cast for the PDP with which Umahi was declared the winner of the Ebonyi guber elections in 2019 were a pre-election matter.

It goes beyond blind arguments propelled by slavish devotion to a political party.

If there is no interference and this case gets tested on the juridical crucible, Umahi and deputy are no-hopers.

The PDP did their homework.

seunmsg:


It is not just about precedence but about the law. Is the judgement based on any known law?

So you see, it’s about law and not just precedence. There is no law backing the decision of that High court judge and hence, the judgement cannot stand.

Like seriously?

You are joking I suppose...

JONNYSPUTE:
.... You ve said it all. The judgment by Ekwo was based on moral grounds but the truth of the matter is that both the political parties and our Constitution did not capture the issues of defection inrespect of the executives so I'm still wondering where the judge based his judgement from.

We should also understand that the constitution of a country supercedes every other laws

Stop embarrassing yourself, ogbeni.

Go and read the judgement and see the grounds adduced by the judge to arrive at his verdict.

Most legal experts a senior constitutional lawyers agree that the judgement is impeccable both in law and in fact.

Why is Umahi running from pillar to post since the verdict was given if he thinks it is a frivolous judgement?

I have no doubt that his legal team have told him that he will go through the fire to pull the chestnuts out.

It is plain simple-mindedness to suggest that a judge of Ekwo's standing would expose himself to ridicule by giving an offhand judgement in a matter he knows would elicit serious scrutiny.

A wise man does not dismiss the opponent's strength: He acknowledges them and prepares to overcome them...

No law in Nigeria removes leaders of the executive arm of government from power on account of defection.

IamAtikulate:

Amechi vs Omehia is the lastest precedence

Read the verdict

The Amaechi case is different from the Umahi case and even at that, the Supreme Court made it clear in Amaechi’s case that the judgement cannot be referenced in the future as judicial precedent.

maestroferddi:
Like seriously?

You are joking I suppose...

So, which section of the constitution says a governor should be removed from office after defection?

seunmsg:


So, which section of the constitution says a governor should be removed from office after defection?

Get a sound lawyer to break the 1999 constitution, as regards the removal of elected officials, to you.

You guys think we are talking about the laws of the Medes and the Persians here where extenuating circumstances do not have bearing on adjudication...

seunmsg:


The Amaechi case is different from the Umahi case and even at that, the Supreme Court made it clear in Amaechi’s case that the judgement cannot be referenced in the future as judicial precedent.

Listen to yourself!

May we see where the Supreme Court stated that the Amaechi vs Omehia case should not be cited going forward?

The lie you are telling is a haram in law. It is a travesty in law and natural justice.

You can't be supporting the APC without putting on the toga of cluelessness...

maestroferddi:
Get a sound lawyer to break the 1999 constitution, as regards the removal of elected officials, to you.

You guys think we are talking about the laws of the Medes and the Persians here where extenuating circumstances do not have bearing on adjudication...

The usual empty huff and puff. Cite the section of the constitution that says an elected governor should be removed if he defects from the party that sponsored him. No need for any unnecessary shalaye.

seunmsg:


The usual empty huff and puff. Cite the section of the constitution that says an elected governor should be removed if he defects from the party that sponsored him. No need for any unnecessary shalaye.

Don't be simple-minded Ogbeni.

Keep waiting for verbatim excerpts of the constitution while common sense eludes you.

Judges are know to make inferences and deductions based on extant cases.

Maybe the Supreme Court did not know that the 1999 constitution existed when they made extrapolations, inferences and deductions in ruling that mandates belong to political parties who are the sponsors of elections in Amaechi vs Omehia and in the Faleke suit.

There is a reason they brand you guys "zombies": you guys reason mediaevally...

maestroferddi:
Don't be simple-minded Ogbeni.

Keep waiting for verbatim excerpts of the constitution while common sense eludes you.

Judges are know make inferences and deductions based on extant cases.

Maybe the Supreme Court did not know that the 1999 constitution existed when they made extrapolations, inferences and deductions in ruling that mandates belong to political parties who are the sponsors of elections in Amaechi vs Omehia and in the Faleke suit.

There is a reason they brand you guys "zombies": you guys reason mediaevally...

At the end of the day, all you could do was throw around empty words. The Supreme Court judgement in AGF vs Atiku is the only relevant precedent in this matter and that’s what will be used to decide the case.

seunmsg:


At the end of the day, all you could do was throw around empty words. The Supreme Court judgement in AGF vs Atiku is the only relevant precedent in this matter and that’s what will be used to decide the case.

lol..

You may do well to stick to what you know...

Barring political interference, this case will prove a no-brainer at the Supreme Court.

When the time comes, you then advise the court on which previous case to cherry-pick...

kahal29:
https://www.nairaland.com/7030490/defection-why-umahi-deputy-may

In response to the above thread, i strongly believe that Umahi and Deputy will WIN and TRIUMPH at the appeal court. This is because you cannot build something on nothing and expect it to stand.

The case of Amaechi vs Omehia as cited by Sagay does not arise in this instance because that was a Pre-election matter and in this case we neither dealing with a Pre-election matter handled by ordinary courts nor Post-election matter handled by the election tribunals.

Second, the issue before the supreme court in the case of Amaechi vs Omehia was to determine who was the lawful and rightful candidate of the PDP in the said election and the supreme court said it was Amaechi because in the eyes of the law he was never substituted.

However in this case the question is not about who is the candidate in an election but rather what happens to a candidate who participated in an election, won the election, sworn in and later changed party by way of defection of which the Nigerian Constitution is silent on such matters.

Thus, the judgement by Justice Inyang Ekwo cannot stand at the appellate court because like i said earlier you cannot build something on nothing and expect it to stand.

Which defection law in our constitution did justice Inyang base his judgement on?

The judge simply embarked on judicial voyage and activism to create a new law which does not exist and the Supreme court in plethora of cases frowns at such adventure. In the case of Attorney General of the Federation V. Abubakar (2007) 10 NWLR (part 1041) 1. At page 124 of the report, Justice Onnoghen set down the position thus:

It is the constitutional responsibility of the legislature to make or amend the laws including the constitution, where the need arises, while that of the judiciary remains to interpret and apply the laws so made or amended. The courts can therefore not add or subtract from the law as enacted by the legislature under the guise of judicial interpretation of the constitution or statute…”

The judgement also erroneously relied on Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court in Faleke v. INEC. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court decision in Faleke v. INEC does not relate to the consequence of the defection of a governor from one political party to the other.

A more apt instance will be the Atiku Abubakar scenario wherein Atiku Abubakar as Vice President, elected under the PDP, defected to the then Action Congress.

The position of the Supreme Court was clearly stated in Attorney General of the Federation V. Abubakar (2007) 10 NWLR (part 1041) 1 where Justice Onnoghen held thus:

“There is nowhere in the 1999 Constitution where it is stated that the President or Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be removed or is removable from that office if he defects from the political party on whose platform he was elected to that office and joins another political party.”

There is also the question of Jurisdiction i.e whether a civil or criminal proceedings can be brought in the case of a sitting Governor covered by immunity clause of the Nigerian constitution.

My humble submission others are free to add theirs

Let me ask you a very simple and elementary question,
1. The certificate of return issued to Devil Umahi by the INEC bears which party name, PDP or APC
2. Without INEC certificate of return, what else has Umahi to lay claim to the governor's seat of Ebonyi State??
3. Assuming the PDP's only arguments before the Court is hinged on the threshold of the fact, the certificate of ruturned issued by INEC was to one David Umahi of PDP as it is rightly written on the said certificate, and never to David Umahi of the APC , don't you think the game is up for Umahi
Go and read the judgment of the Court in the case that involved the late Abubakar Audu in Kogi State and the PDP in 2012. Maybe you will be enlightened because for now you are sounding emotional and emotions has no bases in law.

maestroferddi:
Ridiculous thread.

We are waiting for the Supreme Court to contradict itself having given express ruling on similar matters in the recent past.

Let someone step up to prove at the Supreme Court that votes cast for the PDP with which Umahi was declared the winner of the Ebonyi guber elections in 2019 were a pre-election matter.

It goes beyond blind arguments propelled by slavish devotion to a political party.

If there is no interference and this case gets tested on the juridical crucible, Umahi and deputy are no-hopers.

The PDP did their homework.

No mind them jare! Allow them to keep on quoting the wrong sections of the law.
Parties have their do's and dont's
Nobody force you to join any political if you cannot abide by their rules
You cannot come to my house i give you good to eat and when you're done eating you go away with my plates.
As for which authority His Lordship, Hon. Justice Inyang Ekwo, based his judgment, so many of them, making noise about the judgment sacking their umahi, have never heard of judicial activitism.