Kogi Guber Petition: CSO Accuses Court of Appeal of Usurping Tribunal’s Powers

A civil society organization, the Northern Initiative for the Defence of Democracy and Justice, has accused the Court of Appeal of usurping the powers of the Kogi State Governorship Petition Tribunal.

The Coordinator of the group, Nureeddeen Sadiq, while addressing a press conference in Abuja, expressed concern over the Appeal Court’s decision to revise and overrule the earlier decision of the Kogi State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal.

The group raised alarm over the potential implications of such interference on the judiciary and the country as a whole.

According to the group, the Kogi State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal had earlier ruled that all parties involved in the case should jointly inspect the materials used in the November 11, 2023 governorship election.

However, the Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Abuja attempted to revise and overrule this earlier decision, which has raised concerns among observers of the tribunal’s activities.

The group emphasized that the tribunal, as a direct fact-finding panel, has the power to issue directives and orders on the mode of its operations to accomplish its duties.

It noted that the tribunal had made several orders in favor of the petitioners, including the inspection of electoral materials used for the November 11, 2023, Governorship Election of Kogi State.

The group further explained that despite efforts to comply with the tribunal’s orders, including a meeting held at the INEC headquarters with all parties represented, some parties, particularly Usman Ododo of the All Progressives Congress (APC), raised objections.

Ododo, through his lawyer, filed a motion to set aside the inspection, claiming he was not personally served with the orders. However, the tribunal dismissed the motion, leading Ododo to appeal the decision at the Court of Appeal.

In its judgment delivered on March 1, 2024, the Court of Appeal agreed that the tribunal was right to hold that Ahmed Ododo was duly served.

However, the court disagreed with some of the orders made by the tribunal and ordered that inspections done be set aside and fresh inspections conducted with Ododo participating.

The group expressed concern that the orders granted by the Court of Appeal were never prayed for either in the motion filed on January 9, 2024, or in the Notice of Appeal filed on February 9, 2024.

This has raised questions about the extent of the appellate court’s intervention in the affairs of the tribunal, potentially undermining its independence and authority.