Breaking News
Translate

S/Court throws out Uba’s suit against Obi

By Ise-Oluwa Ige

ABUJA—A full panel of the Supreme Court led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Idris Kutigi yesterday aborted the legal move by the gubernatorial flag-bearer of the People Democratic Party (PDP) in the April 2007 election in Anambra State, Chief Andy Uba to re-open the suit filed by Governor Peter Obi  of Anambra state which led to his (Uba) sack from office.

He had wanted a reversal of the pronouncement of the apex court with respect to his mandate in order to sack Governor Obi from office and step into his shoes.

Andy Uba, it would be recalled, was declared the winner of the controversial April 14, 2007 gubernatorial election in Anambra state by INEC but he was sacked from office by the Supreme Court only two weeks and four days after he took the oath of office.

The apex court, in it’s judgment, had held that there was no vacancy in the Anambra Government House into which INEC conducted election which he allegedly won.

Uba who was not satisfied with the pronouncement had made several legal moves, the latest of which was aborted yesterday, to reclaim back his mandate but to no avail.

The apex court which had harsh words for him yesterday while dismissing his appeal to unseat Governor Obi and reclaim back his mandate also tongue-lashed members of the inner bar, particularly his lead counsel, Mr Joseph Daudu (SAN), whom it said, were in the habit of accepting to handle dangerous cases, like the instant one, which main purpose is either to embarrass the judiciary or destroy its integrity.

Justice Kutigi said he had expected senior lawyers like Uba’s counsel to advise him on the path of honour to toe instead of allowing themselves to be used to destroy the judiciary which they all have the responsibility to protect.

He said the apex court was also surprised at the way Dr Uba conducted himself for the singular purpose of getting himself into the Anambra Government House, moving from one court to another and filing the same appeal which had already being decided on its merit over and over again before same court.


Disclaimer

Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.