During an interview on Arise Television, constitutional lawyer Daniel Bwala voiced concerns on Monday, asserting that the authority of the Supreme Court, recognized as the ultimate court in the nation, has been brought into question by the recent Court of Appeal decision on Plateau State elections.
Bwala highlighted the apparent contradiction in the Court of Appeal’s actions, noting that in cases from Benue, Ebonyi, and other jurisdictions, the court had deferred to the authority of the Supreme Court by dismissing pre-election matters.
However, he expressed bewilderment as to why the same court took jurisdiction over the Plateau State issue.

He stated, “This case of Plateau State, when it gets to the Supreme Court, it would be the case of Supreme Court versus Court of Appeal.”
Bwala emphasized the importance of the Supreme Court’s role in upholding the sanctity and integrity of its judgments, particularly referencing the Presidential Election Tribunal’s decision.
He explained that the Supreme Court must determine whether its judgments are binding on subordinate courts, highlighting the concept that decisions by the final court constitute settled law.
Expressing concern over diminishing public confidence in the judiciary, Bwala questioned the inconsistency where courts in Ebonyi, Benue, and elsewhere obeyed Supreme Court judgments, while the Court of Appeal in Plateau State seemingly disregarded a similar directive regarding pre-election matters.
He concluded by referencing past practices, stating, “In the days of Justice Tobi, they never failed to chastise the court below them when the court below them disobeyed the judgment they passed.”
Support InfoStride News' Credible Journalism: Only credible journalism can guarantee a fair, accountable and transparent society, including democracy and government. It involves a lot of efforts and money. We need your support. Click here to Donate