News

December 5, 2011

Tinubu, LP suit: Judge warns parties against delay

By BARTHOLOMEW MADUKWE, CHIDIMMA OKEREAFOR & NANCY OGBUJI

LAGOS— The new National/State Houses of Assembly Petition panel handling the retrial of the petition filed by the Labour Party, LP, against the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC,  Action Congress of Nigeria, and Mrs. Oluremi Tinubu has warned that it will not tolerate delay by any of the parties.

The Court of Appeal had, in a judgement delivered on November 1, 2011, ordered a re-trial of the case, which led to the reconstitution of the new panel that would be sitting at Lagos High Court, Igbosere.

Justice A.A. Nwaigwe-led tribunal, while addressing the court, called for cooperation from all parties in the petition and advised them to prepare well in the case by ensuring that any action that could amount to delay was avoided.

In his words: “In order to achieve the purpose for which this Tribunal was set up, you must not only be punctual to all the sessions of the Tribunal, but must be ready and prepared to do your case in good faith.”

He warned that  unwarranted adjournments will not be tolerated by the panel.

According to him, the new panel will dispense justice without fear or favour.

“Don’t try to influence the Tribunal directly or indirectly through unorthodox means. Bear in mind that justice is for both parties and not for any particular person,” Justice Nwaigwe warned.

Justice Nwaigwe, who was among the 110 judges sworn in for 2011 election cases and had discharged such duty in Ebonyi State, urged parties in the petition to prepare well before approaching the tribunal.

Working with him in the Labour Party (LP) election disputes is Justice N.S Adeyanju, who will be joined by Justice D.Z Senchi.

Counsel for parties in the petition made various submissions regarding the state of the petition before it was dismissed by the last Tribunal.

It will be recalled that previous Tribunal had dismissed the LP petition on the ground that the party filed its pre-hearing notice as a letter instead of motion.

But the Appeal Court held in its judgment that the law did not state that pre-hearing notice must be filed as a motion, adding “while some may prefer letter, other may go for a motion.” The Appeal Court told the parties in the petition that what was paramount was that the law provides for a pre-hearing notice to be filed, which the appellants complied with accordingly.

The Justice Nwaigwe- led tribunal adjourned session to December 5, 2011, for commencement of pre-trial conference and urged parties to also assist the tribunal to fast- track the process.