Nothing to comment about – Makarfi group
We‘re satisfied – Sheriff faction
By Vivian Okejeme and
Emeka Eze, Abuja
The lingering intraparty crisis bedevilling the opposition Peoples Democratic Party appears to be gradually grinding to a halt.
This followed the Supreme Court’s ruling, which yesterday, reserved its judgement on the appeal filed by the Senator Ali Modu Sheriff–led faction of the party.
The Senator Ahmed Mohammed Makarfi-led group had filed an appeal challenging the February 7 ruling of the Port Harcourt Division of the Court of Appeal, which declared Sheriff the authentic National Chairman of the party.
Dissatisfied with the verdict, Makarfi headed for the Supreme Court and asked that the judgement lacked substance, and should therefore be set aside.
However, Sheriff, on his part, faulted Makarifi’s decision to appeal the judgement and therefore asked the Apex Court to nullify the appeal for lacking merit.
Ruling on the appeal, a five-man panel, led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, upheld Makarfi’s right to appeal but reserved its ruling on the matter till a later date.
The appellants are praying the apex court to set aside the judgement and uphold Makarfi-led National Caretaker Committee.
In the ruling delivered by the CJN, he granted the Makarfi-led faction leave to challenge the Appeal Court’s verdict that recognised Sheriff as leader of the party.
The ruling
The CJN held that under Section 27 of Supreme Court Rules, the appellants had a period of three months to appeal against the judgement, declaring also that the notice of appeal was properly filed and served in April.
“We find merit in the application. Leave is hereby granted to the appellants to appeal on grounds of mixed laws and facts,” he said.
Legal fireworks
Shortly after the ruling, the apex court went ahead to hear and entertain arguments from all the parties leadership crises.
Counsel to the appellants, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, prayed the apex court to allow the appeal and set aside the appellate court’s judgement.
In his own submission, Counsel to Sheriff, Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, challenged the competence of the appeal which they said deserved to be struck out with substantial cost.
In the same vein, the PDP under Sheriff, through its counsel, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, urged the court to dismiss or strike out the appeal on the ground that the appellants did not obtain the necessary authorisation of the party to file an appeal in its name.
“My lords, the cardinal issue for determination here is whether a party in whose name an appeal was filed has a right to withdraw such appeal.
“My lords it is not about locus, but the right of person in whose name a case was filed to withdraw it,” he submitted.
He drew attention of the court to a letter dated March 15, 2017, in which the Sheriff-led faction of the party applied to withdraw the appeal marked: SC/133/2017.
In a written address he filed against the appeal, Sheriff insisted that in view of the subsisting verdict of the appellate court, he remained the authentic leader of the party.
He told the apex court that PDP, under his leadership, was comfortable with the appellate court’s verdict and had no intention to challenge it.
Besides, the Sheriff-led group contended that the decision of the Makarfi committee to file an appeal in the name of the PDP without authorisation, was not only illegal, but also in violation of the party’s constitution.
Relying on the provisions of Chapter 5, Articles 35(1), 36(1) and 42(1) of the PDP Constitution, they argued that the party, with a corporate personality, could only act through the principal national officers, whose powers and functions are stated in the constitution.
According to them, the Makarfi Committee could only challenge the appellate court verdict as interested parties after they must have firstly secured leave of court to file an appeal.
They maintained that the suit should either be dismissed or struck out since the supposed appellants (Makarfi’s PDP), neither obtained leave of the Court of Appeal nor that of the Supreme Court before filing the appeal which was based on mixed law and facts.
In a counter argument, the Makarfi Committee urged the court not to allow the respondents frustrate hearing of the case on its merit.
The appellants argued that it was wrong for Sheriff and others, who had earlier briefed Chief Olujinmi, to represent them in the substantive appeal and had filed a respondents’ brief, in which they also made similar arguments in relation to the competence of the appeal, to again brief Fagbemi, to ask the court not to hear the appeal at all, but to strike it out.
Relying on Order 8 Rule 6 (1), (2) and (4) of the Supreme Court’s Rules, the Makarfi Committee faulted the March 15, 2017, letter of the Sheriff-led NEC, applying to withdraw the appeal and the subsequent application for it to be struck out.
The appellants argued that since the appeal was not filed by Sheriff and others, they lacked the right to apply to withdraw it.
At this point, the panel reserved ruling on the matter, and said it would communicate the judgement date to all the parties.
Reactions
Asked to comment on the ruling, Prince Dayo Adeyeye, spokesman of the Makarfi group, kept mute.
Adeyeye, who spoke to our correspondent on the telephone said: “I have no comment at all to make. There is nothing to comment about; I don’t want to say anything.”
But the Deputy National Chairman of the Sherrif faction, Dr Cairo Ojougboh, expressed satisfaction with the ruling.
“We are satisfied with the Supreme Court ruling today and we now await the final judgement. Since the Supreme Court allowed the Makarfi people to have their say, contrary to what we canvassed for, you know we have always had confidence in the judiciary, we are okay with the ruling and we wait for the final judgement and we are very confident that justice will be done in the matter”, Ojougboh told our reporter.
