Hope Democratic Party (HDP) has returned to the Supreme Court to challenge the declaration of President Muhammadu Buhari as the winner of 2019 presidential election.
The apex court had recently sacked an earlier suit by the party challenging the emergence of Buhari on technical ground.
However, in a fresh motion filed before the Supreme Court, HDP is asking the apex court to reverse itself in the judgment delivered on October 3.
The party is contending that the judgment delivered by Justice Mary Peter Odili in favour of Buhari is invalid and unconstitutional.
The party said, the judgment was based on technicalities of law rather than merit and justice.
In the fresh motion on notice brought pursuant to order 8 rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules and sections 6 and 36 of the 1999 constitution as well as section 22 of the Supreme Court Act, HDP and its presidential candidate, Chief Ambrose Albert Owuru, pleaded with the court to restore their appeal for fresh hearing on merit.
The motion filed by Chukwunonyerem Njoku, the appellants insisted that the dismissal of their appeal on October 3 on technical ground was without compliance with the mandatory procedure of law.
The fresh motion predicated on eight grounds indicated that the appeal dismissed on preliminary objection of Buhari without requisite applications after filed briefs and incorporation of notice of objection without leave of the apex court is a nullity and liable to be set aside.
The party further said that by virtue of order 8 upon which the dismissal was based, an appellant whose appeal has been dismissed under the rule may apply by notice of motion that the appeal be restored and heard on merit.
The appellants maintained that there are exceptional circumstances as required by law to cause the restoration of the appeal having been dismissed on technical ground without respondents first applying for or granted leave to prevent ambush or surprise to them to prevent the hearing of the appeal on merit and affirm their claim as winners of February 16, presidential referendum election.
Among other things, the party is also claiming that the decision of the court arising from respondents’ ambush, intimidation, misdirection of court and non compliance with the strict rules and procedures for hearing notice of preliminary objection is invalid and a nullity in law and liable to be set aside.
Latest posts by Ripples Nigeria (see all)
- Nigerian govt to ‘respond comprehensively’ to US travel ban - January 27, 2020
- Julius Berger’s profit leaps by 70% at Full Year 2019 - January 27, 2020
- America’s Netflix further embraces inclusion, charges Kenyans in local currency. Which country next? - January 27, 2020